Holloway v. MetroTech/Metropolitan Security Contracts of Single Proprietorship under Bidding Competition
| Walter Holloway |
| MetroTech/Metropolitan Security Contracts of Single Proprietorship under Bidding Competition |
| 8:2023cv00396 |
| September 5, 2023 |
| US District Court for the District of Nebraska |
| Joseph F Bataillon |
| Pro Se Docket |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 31, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted, and the Complaint shall be filed without payment of fees. Plaintiff is advised that the next step in his case will be for the Court to conduct an initial review of his 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)(TCL)
|
| Filing 6 Mail Returned as Undeliverable addressed to Walter Holloway at 1117 Nicholas Street, Omaha, Ne 68102 regarding Notice of Deficiency (No Signature) 3 , Notice by Clerk (Pro Se Case) #4 , Order - Pro Se GO 2022-04 #5 . Mail NOT RE-MAILED - not deliverable as addressed, unable to forward. (ADB) |
|
Filing 5
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)(TCL)
|
| Filing 4 NOTICE by Clerk acknowledging receipt of complaint filed by a pro se party. (TCL) |
| Filing 3 TEXT NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY by Deputy Clerk that the Complaint - Pro Se #1 has been filed and is considered deficient because the document is not signed. The plaintiff shall correct the deficiency within 14 days of the date of this entry or the pleading may be stricken from the record of this case. See NECivR 11.1.(TCL) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis on behalf of Plaintiff Walter Holloway.(TCL) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against MetroTech/Metropolitan Security Contracts of Single Proprietorship under Bidding Competition. No Summons issued, filed on behalf of plaintiff Walter Holloway.(TCL) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Holloway v. MetroTech/Metropolitan Security Contracts of Single Proprietorship under Bidding Competition | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Walter Holloway | |
| 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: MetroTech/Metropolitan Security Contracts of Single Proprietorship under Bidding Competition | |
| 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.
