Dunn v. NENMDF et al
| Woodrow Dunn |
| GEO Group, Inc. and NENMDF |
| 1:2019cv00876 |
| September 20, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of New Mexico |
| Robert C Brack |
| Kirtan Khalsa |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 20, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 MOTION to Amend Complaint by Woodrow Dunn. (yc) |
| Filing 6 Transmittal of State Court Documents by GEO Group, Inc., NENMDF (Attachments: #1 Exhibit) (White, April) |
| Filing 5 MOTION to Dismiss Party by Woodrow Dunn. (yc) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Witness as to Woodrow Dunn (yc) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE by GEO Group, Inc. Statement Regarding 42 USC 1997e(g) and 28 USC 1915A (White, April) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Appearance by April D. White on behalf of GEO Group, Inc. (White, April) |
| Filing 1 NOTICE OF REMOVAL by GEO Group, Inc. from Second Judicial District Court, case number D-202-CV-2019-03303. ( Filing Fee - Online Payment), filed by GEO Group, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(White, April) |
| United States Sr. District Judge Robert C. Brack and United States Magistrate Judge Kirtan Khalsa assigned. (aek) |
| Filing and Administrative Fees Received: $ 400 receipt number 1084-6685569 re #1 Notice of Removal filed by GEO Group, Inc. (Payment made via Pay.gov)(White, April) |
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 New Mexico 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.
