Emilio v. Nebraska Department of Correctional Services et al
Plaintiff: Pavon Emilio
Defendant: Fred Britten, Nebraska Department of Correctional Services, Sawyer and Tan
Case Number: 4:2017cv03027
Filed: March 2, 2017
Court: US District Court for the District of Nebraska
Office: 4 Lincoln Office
Presiding Judge: Pro Se Docket
Presiding Judge: Richard G. Kopf
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
June 8, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 15 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER regarding: Memorandum and Order on Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis 14 . Plaintiff has not paid the fee or submitted a motion for an extension of time to pay the fee. This matter is dismissed without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to prosecute it diligently and failed to comply with this court's orders. The court will enter judgment by a separate document. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(JAB)
May 5, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 14 ORDER that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed IFP (Filing No. 11 ) is granted. Plaintiff must pay an initial partial filing fee of $4.75 within 30 days, unless the court extends the time in which he has to pay in response to a w ritten motion. After payment of the initial partial filing fee, Plaintiff's institution must collect the additional monthly payments in the manner set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2), quoted above, and forward those payments to the court . The clerk's office is directed to send a copy of this order to the appropriate official at Plaintiffs institution. The clerk's office is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: June 5, 20 17: initial partial filing fee payment due. Plaintiff is advised that, following payment of the initial partial filing fee, the next step in Plaintiffs case will be for the court to conduct an initial review of Plaintiff's claims to determine whether summary dismissal is appropriate under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The court will conduct this initial review in its normal course of business. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party and as directed)(LAC)
March 20, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 10 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's correspondence with the court (Filing 9 ), construed as a motion, is denied. To continue with this lawsuit, Plaintiff is directed to submit the $400.00 filing fee to the Clerk of Court's office or su bmit a request to proceed in forma pauperis within 30 days. Failure to take either action will result in dismissal of this matter without further notice. The Clerk of Court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this matter with the following text: April 21, 2017: Check for MIFP or payment. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (KLF)
March 9, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 8 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - that to the extent Plaintiff's Complaint and attachments (Filing 1 ) can be construed as a motion for a temporary restraining order, such motion is denied. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (KLF)
March 6, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER - Plaintiff is directed to submit the $400.00 fees to the clerk's office or submit a request to proceed in forma pauperis within 30 days. Failure to take either action will result in dismissal of this matter without further notice. Th e Clerk of Court is directed to send to Plaintiff the Form AO240 ("Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit"). The Clerk of Court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this matter with the following text: April 6, 2017: Check for MIFP or payment. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party along with Form AO240) (KLF)
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 Nebraska District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Emilio v. Nebraska Department of Correctional Services et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Fred Britten
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Nebraska Department of Correctional Services
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Sawyer
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Tan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Pavon Emilio
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?