Higgins v. Ketchmark et al
| Joseph W Higgins |
| Unknown Federal Springfield Judge, Zwart, M. Douglas Harpool and Roseann A. Ketchmark |
| United States of America |
| 6:2020cv03415 |
| December 28, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Missouri |
| Prisoner Pro Se |
| Brian C Wimes |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 16, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 CLERK'S JUDGMENT: ORDERED that this case is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court's order that he pay an initial partial filing fee. See Doc. #7 . Plaintiff is advised that any motion to reopen this case will be denied unless it is filed in a timely manner and accompanied by the previously-imposed initial partial filing fee. Plaintiff is further cautioned that he will be obligated to pay appellate filing fees of $505.00 if he files an appeal of this order. (Davies, Cindy) |
Filing 11
ORDER: ORDERED that this case is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court's order that he pay an initial partial filing fee. See Doc. #7 . Plaintiff is advised that any motion to reopen this case will be denied unless it is filed in a timely manner and accompanied by the previously-imposed initial partial filing fee. Plaintiff is further cautioned that he will be obligated to pay appellate filing fees of $505.00 if he files an appeal of this order. Signed on February 16, 2021 by District Judge Brian C. Wimes. (Davies, Cindy)
|
| Filing 10 PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE to Orders (Docs. #7 and 9 ) filed by Joseph W Higgins.(Willis, Kathy) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER: ORDERED that, because Plaintiff has not paid the initial partial filing fee as previously ordered, Plaintiff shall show cause, on or before February 11, 2021, as to why this case should not be dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute and for failure to comply with this Court's Orders. Signed on 1/28/2021 by District Judge Brian C. Wimes. This is a TEXT ONLY ENTRY. No document is attached. (Willis, Kathy)
|
| Filing 8 PLAINTIFF'S REPLY to Doc. #5 filed by Joseph W Higgins.(Davies, Cindy) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER that: (1) Plaintiff is granted provisional leave to proceed in forma pauperis; (2) Plaintiff shall pay to the clerk of the court for the Western District of Missouri, Western Division, an initial partial filing fee of $.28; and (3) Plaintiff's failure to pay the required initial partial filing fee on or before January 26, 2021, will result in the dismissal of this case without further notice. Signed on 1/11/2021 by District Judge Brian C. Wimes. (Willis, Kathy)
|
| Filing 6 INMATE ACCOUNT STATEMENT filed by Joseph W Higgins. (Willis, Kathy) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of filing Response to Court Order by United States of America re #4 Order, (Hyde, Cynthia) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER: ORDERED that the United States Attorney for the Western District of Missouri inform the Court whether Plaintiff is a prisoner within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. 1915, 1915A. Signed on January 7, 2021 by District Judge Brian C. Wimes. (Davies, Cindy)
|
| Filing 2 IFP FINANCIAL AFFIDAVIT filed by Joseph W Higgins. (Davies, Cindy) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Joseph W Higgins. (Davies, Cindy) |
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 Missouri Western 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.
