Gomez v. Wilson et al
Martin Gomez |
Dennis Wilson and United States Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration |
8:2012cv00367 |
October 15, 2012 |
US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
8 Omaha Office |
Pro Se Docket |
John M. Gerrard |
Civil Rights: Other |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1442 Petition for Removal |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 40 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's Motions for Reconsideration (filing nos. 35 and 39 ), liberally construed as Motions for Relief Under Rule 60(b), are denied. Ordered by Judge John M. Gerrard. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (AOA) |
Filing 32 MEMORANDUM AN DORDER - Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration (filing no. 28 ), liberally construed as a motion for relief pursuant to Rule 59(e), is denied. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Appeal IFP (filing no. 30 ) is granted. The Clerk of the court shall provide the Court of Appeals with a copy of this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Judge John M. Gerrard. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (AOA) |
Filing 26 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Defendants' Motion to Strike (filing no. 22 ) is denied. Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel (filing no. 21 ) is denied. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (filing no. 12 ) is granted. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Judge John M. Gerrard. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (AOA) |
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 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.