Davis v. Althauser et al
| Robert Davis |
| E. Althauser and John Does |
| 7:2022cv00043 |
| May 6, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky |
| William O Bertelsman |
| P SO |
| Prisoner Petitions (Prison Condition) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 6, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
SUMMONS Returned Executed as to Officer E. Althauser; personally served via US Marshal on 6/23/2022. (TDA)
|
|
Filing 11
SUMMONS Returned Executed by Robert Davis via certified mail by USM to Federal Bureau of Prisons served on 6/13/2022. Service to U.S. Attorney executed via certified mail by USM on 6/9/2022; Service to U.S. Attorney General executed via certified mail by USM on 6/14/2022. (RCB)
|
|
Filing 9
Summons Issued as to E. Althauser, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General & Federal BOP. Summons issued and delivered to U.S. Marshal for service with a completed USM-285 form and service packets to be served. (TDA) (Additional attachment(s) added on 6/6/2022: #1 USM Time Stamp) (TDA).
|
|
Filing 8
ORDER: 1. Clerk shall prepare 3 "Service Packets" for service upon USA, Federal BOP, and Dft E. Althauser. Each Service Packet shall consist of: a. summons; b. complaint (R. #1 ); c. this Order; and d. USM Form 285. 2. Clerk shall send Service Packet(s) to USMS in Lexington, KY and note date of delivery. 3. USMS shall serve USA and Federal BOP by sending a Service Packet by certified or registered mail to: a. Civil Process Clerk at US Attorney for EDKY; b. Attorney General of US in Washington, D.C; and c. Federal Bureau of Prisons in Washington, D.C. 4. USMS personally serve Officer E. Althauser at USP Big Sandy in Inez, KY through arrangement with Federal BOP. Signed by Judge William O. Bertelsman on 6/6/2022. (TDA) cc: Robert Davis by US Mail, USM w/ 4 packets
|
|
Filing 7
FILING FEE received - $402, receipt number 700000022. (TDA)
|
|
***FILE SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of PSO for review: #7 Filing Fee Received. (TDA)
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER: 1. Davis's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (R. #3 ) is DENIED. 2. Within 28 days, Davis must pay $402.00 in filing and administrative fees. 3. Court will dismiss case for failure to prosecute if he does not pay required fees within the time permitted. Signed by Judge William O. Bertelsman on 5/9/2022. (TDA) cc: Robert Davis by US Mail & Finance
|
|
Filing 5
IMPORTANT NOTICE to Pro Se Filer: Information relating to pro se filings and F.R.Civ.P. 5.2 requiring personal identifiers be partially redacted from documents filed with the court. #Click here for more information on the rules. It is the sole responsibility of counsel and the parties to comply with the rules requiring redaction of personal data identifiers.cc: pro se filer via U.S. Mail (Attachments: #1 Sample Caption)(RCB)
|
|
Filing 4
Certificate of Inmate Account by Robert Davis, pro se. (RCB)
|
|
Filing 3
MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Robert Davis, pro se. Motions referred to PSO. (RCB)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT filed by Robert Davis, pro se. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit - Medical Documents, #2 Exhibit - Administrative Remedy, #3 Envelope pm 5/3/2022)(RCB)
|
|
Conflict Check run. (RCB)
|
|
***MOTION SUBMITTED TO CHAMBERS of PSO for review: re #3 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Robert Davis (RCB)
|
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
