Moore v. Caine et al
| Andre Moore |
| Lieutenant Caine and Lalchan Singh |
| 1:2015cv02062 |
| April 10, 2015 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Brooklyn Office |
| Carol Bagley Amon |
| Lois Bloom |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| 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
29
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The Court has reviewed the record and, finding no clear error, adopts the R&R as the opinion of the Court. Accordingly, this action is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 37(b)(2) and 41(b). The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly. Ordered by Judge Carol Bagley Amon on 7/28/2016. (fwd for judgment) (Fernandez, Erica)
|
|
Filing
8
ORDER: Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, requests a 6 certificate of Defendants' default and in an attached 7 affirmation asserts that Defendants have been served with the complaint and summons but have failed to appea r or respond. However, the U.S. Marshals Service is effecting service of the complaint and summons on Plaintiff's behalf and has not yet filed proof of service. Until proof of service on both defendants is filed, any 6 request for default must be denied. SO ORDERED by Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom, on 6/16/2015. C/mailed. (Latka-Mucha, Wieslawa)
|
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 York Eastern 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.
