Heyliger v. Iffert et al
| Derek A. Heyliger |
| J. Phillips, Pritchard, Donald Venettozzi, Peacock, John Doe, B. Lashinsky, G. Murphy, Michael Iffert, Miller, K. Vilmar, Anthony Annucci and Vascue |
| 9:2018cv01113 |
| September 17, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of New York |
| Christian F Hummel |
| Lawrence E Kahn |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 21, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 NOTICE to plaintiff that seven copies of his complaint and seven completed and signed USM-285 forms are required by 12/3/18 in order for the US Marshals to effect service on defendants. (nas, ) |
Filing 6
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED, that Plaintiff's IFP Application (Dkt. No. #2 ) is GRANTED. ORDERED, that the RLUIPA claims against Defendants in their individual capacities are DISMISSED with prejudice. ORDERED, that the following claims are DISMISSED without prejudice: (1) constitutional claims related to false reports and testimony; (2) Eighth Amendment conditions of-confinement claims; and (3) First Amendment retaliation claims. ORDERED, that the following claims SURVIVE initial review and require a response: (1) Fourteenth Amendment due process claims against Peacock, Miller, Annucci, and Venettozzi; (2) First Amendment religious freedom claim against Iffert, Murphy, Vilmar, and Doe; and (3) equal protection claims against Iffert, Murphy, and Vilmar. ORDERED, that Pritchard, Phillips, Lashinsky, and Vascue are DISMISSED as defendants.Service is directed. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 11/1/18. {order served via regular mail on plaintiff}(nas, )
|
| Notification to Superintendent of Filing - Provided Superintendent at Attica Correctional Facility with notice of instant action and a copy of Plaintiff's #4 Inmate Authorization Form. USDC/NYND Finance Dept notified. (nas, ) |
|
Filing 5
TEXT ORDER REOPENING CASE: This action was administratively closed due to plaintiff's failure to comply with the filing fee requirements, and plaintiff was directed to respond to the Order if s/he wished to pursue this action. Plaintiff has now responded. The Clerk is directed to reopen this action and restore it to the Court's active docket. Authorized by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 9/24/18. {text order served via regular mail on plaintiff}(nas, )
|
| Filing 4 INMATE AUTHORIZATION FORM by Derek A. Heyliger. (nas, ) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER Directing Administrative Closure with Opportunity to Comply with Filing Fee Requirement: ORDERED that because this action was not properly commenced, the Clerk is directed to administratively close this action. ORDERED that if plaintiff desires to pursue this action, he must so notify the Court WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS of the filing date of this Order and either (1) pay the full $400.00 filing fee for civil actions or (2) submit a signed Inmate Authorization Form. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 9/18/18. {order and blank authorization form served via regular mail on plaintiff}(nas, )
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Derek A. Heyliger. (nas, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Anthony Annucci, John Doe, Michael Iffert, B. Lashinsky, Miller, G. Murphy, Peacock, J. Phillips, Pritchard, Vascue, Donald Venettozzi, K. Vilmar filed by Derek A. Heyliger. (Attachments: #1 envelope)(nas, ) |
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 York Northern 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.
