Moellenberndt v. Nessaief et al
Plaintiff: Devin Lee Moellenberndt
Defendant: Mohammed Nessaief, Rodriguez Emilio and Scott Frakes
Case Number: 4:2022cv03178
Filed: August 25, 2022
Court: US District Court for the District of Nebraska
Presiding Judge: Joseph F Bataillon
Referring Judge: Pro Se Docket
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on August 14, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 17, 2022 TEXT ENTRY THAT INITIAL PARTIAL FILING fee paid on behalf of Devin Lee Moellenberndt on 10/17/2022. Receipt number 8065039, in the amount of $ 18.00. (JES)
September 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 11 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's Motions for Leave to Proceed IFP, Filing No. #5 ; Filing No. #7 , are granted. Plaintiff must pay an initial partial filing fee of $18.00 within 30 days, unless the Court extends the time in which he has to pay in response to a written 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 Plaintiff's institution. The clerk's office is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: October 28, 2022: initial partial filing fee payment due. Plaintiff is advised that, following payment of the initial partial filing fee, the next step in Plaintiff's 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 Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party and plaintiff's institution)(LKO)
September 19, 2022 Filing 10 PRISONER ACCOUNT STATEMENT by Plaintiff Devin Lee Moellenberndt. ACCESS TO THE PDF DOCUMENT IS RESTRICTED TO CASE PARTICIPANTS AND THE COURT PURSUANT TO THE E-GOVERNMENT ACT AND FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 5.2(a). (LKO)
September 16, 2022 Filing 8 AFFIDAVIT regarding MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis #7 on behalf of Plaintiff Devin Lee Moellenberndt.(ADB)
September 16, 2022 Filing 7 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis on behalf of Plaintiff Devin Lee Moellenberndt. (ADB)
September 8, 2022 Filing 6 LETTER by Clerk requesting plaintiff's trust account statement from institution. Letter sent to Nebraska Department of Correctional Services. (LKO)
September 8, 2022 Filing 5 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis on behalf of Plaintiff Devin Lee Moellenberndt. (LKO)
August 30, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 4 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff is directed to submit the $402.00 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. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send to Plaintiff the Form AO240 ("Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit"). The Clerk of the Court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this matter with the following text: September 29, 2022: Check for MIFP or payment. Ordered by Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LKO)
August 25, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 GENERAL ORDER NO. 2022-04: This general order provides for the management and assignment of cases filed by a plaintiff or petitioner without counsel. This general order also includes the definition of the pro se docket, responsibilities of the pro se law clerks and scheduling and discovery requirements in pro se cases. Ordered by Chief Judge Robert F. Rossiter, Jr.. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(LKO)
August 25, 2022 Filing 2 NOTICE by Clerk acknowledging receipt of complaint filed by a pro se party. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LKO)
August 25, 2022 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Rodriguez Emilio, Scott Frakes, and Mohammed Nessaief filed on behalf of pro se plaintiff Devin Lee Moellenberndt. (LKO)

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: Moellenberndt v. Nessaief et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Devin Lee Moellenberndt
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: Mohammed Nessaief
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: Rodriguez 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 ]
Defendant: Scott Frakes
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?