Swift v. Jerabek et al
| Arnetta Swift |
| Judge Bazis, Foxall, Judge Huber, Mikki Jerabek and Dunning Sheriff |
| 8:2016cv00067 |
| February 8, 2016 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| 8 Omaha Office |
| Pro Se Docket |
| Richard G. Kopf |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
18
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that 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) (LAC)
|
|
Filing
17
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that Plaintiff will have 30 days in which to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Retraining Order and Preliminary Injunction 9 and for a hearing thereon 14 are denied. The clerk is directed to set the following pro se case management deadline: July 8, 2016: check for amended complaint; dismiss if none filed. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (JSF)
|
|
Filing
15
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that the plaintiff must update her address within 30 days. Failure to do so will result in dismissal of the following actions without further notice to Plaintiff: Case No. 8:16CV150; 8:16CV151; 8:16CV152; and 8:16CV67. The clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in these cases using the following text: May 23, 2016: check for address. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (JSF)
|
|
Filing
10
ORDER that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed IFP (Filing No. 8 ) is granted. Plaintiff must pay an initial partial filing fee of $61.83 within 30 days, unless the court extends the time in which she has to pay in response to a writte n 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 cl erk'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: April 1, 201 6: 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 Richard G. Kopf. (Copies mailed as directed) (LAC)
|
|
Filing
7
ORDER that 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. The 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: March 25, 2016: Check for MIFP or payment. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (LAC)
|
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.
