Rush v. Mooney
| John Rush |
| R. Mooney |
| 3:2011cv00736 |
| October 12, 2011 |
| US District Court for the District of Nevada |
| Reno Office |
| Valerie P. Cooke |
| Larry R. Hicks |
| 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
16
ORDER. IT IS ORDERED that petitioner's motion to re-issue screening order 12 is DENIED as moot. FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis 1 is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall not be required to pay an initial i nstallment of the filing fee. In the event that this action is dismissed, the full filing fee must still be paid. The movant herein is permitted to maintain this action to conclusion without the necessity of prepayment of any additional fees or cost s or the giving of securitytherefor. This order granting leave to proceed in forma pauperis shall not extend to the issuance of subpoenas at government expense. The NDOC shall payto the Clerk of the United States District Court, District of Nevada, 20% of the preceding months deposits to plaintiffs account (inmate #62211), in the months that the account exceeds $10.00, until the full $350.00 filing fee has been paid for this action. The Clerk of the Court shall send a copy of thi s order to the Finance Division of the Clerks Office (Sent). The Clerk shall also send a copy of this order to the attention of the Chief of Inmate Services for the Nevada Department of Corrections, P.O. Box 7011, Carson City, NV 89702 (Sent). The C lerk shall electronically serve a copy of this order and a copy of plaintiff's complaint 8 on the Office of the Attorney General of the State of Nevada, attention Pamela Sharp (Sent). The Attorney General's Office shall advise the Court within twenty-one (21) days of the date of the entry of this order whether it can accept service of process for the named defendants. As to any of the named defendants for which the Attorney Generals Office cannot accept service, the Office shall fil e, under seal, the last known address(es) of those defendant(s). If service cannot be accepted for any of the named defendant(s), plaintiff shall file a motion identifying the unserved defendant(s). If the Attorney General accepts service of proces s for any named defendant(s), such defendant(s) shall file and serve an answer or other response to the complaint 8 within sixty (60) days from the date of this order. Plaintiff shall serve upon defendant(s) a copy of every pleading and include a certificate of service.(Copy of Complaint 8 mailed to plaintiff)(Notice of Compliance is due by 2/21/2012.) Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 1/31/2012. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MLC)
|
|
Filing
10
ORDER RE: INFORMAL SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS. This case will not be referred for formal mediation. However, the court encourages the parties to engage in informal discussions in an effort to settle this case. A courtesy copy of this order and the com plaint shall be provided to defendants' counsel. (Electronically sent 11/9/2011, see NEF for service details.) If parties are able to settle, during the 90 day stay, the $350.00 filing fee need not be paid. However, if parties are unable to settle the Court will reconsider the motion to proceed IFP, and plaintiff will have to pay the filing fee in full. Signed by Magistrate Judge Valerie P. Cooke on 11/8/2011. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - KO)
|
|
Filing
9
ORDERED that P's # 6 Motion for the sheriff or the United States Marshal to serve the complaint is DENIED as moot. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 11/7/2011. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
|
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 Nevada 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: Rush v. Mooney | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: R. Mooney | |
| Represented By: | Catherine Cortez-Masto |
| Represented By: | Jeffrey Paul Hoppe |
| 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: John Rush | |
| 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.
