Louis v. Trump et al
| Joe W. Louis |
| Mr. Putkin, United Nations Security Council, North Korea, Netanyu, President Trump and President Israel |
| 1:2018cv07879 |
| August 28, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Colleen McMahon |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 25, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Appeal Record Sent to USCA (Electronic File). Certified Indexed record on Appeal Electronic Files for #4 Notice of Appeal filed by Joe W. Louis were transmitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals. (tp) |
| Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Certified Copy of Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals re: #4 Notice of Appeal. (tp) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF APPEAL from #2 Order of Dismissal, #3 Judgment - Sua Sponte (Complaint). Document filed by Joe W. Louis. Form D-P is due within 14 days to the Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. (tp) |
| Appeal Fee Due: for #4 Notice of Appeal. Appeal fee due by 10/1/2018. (tp) |
| Appeal Remark as to #4 Notice of Appeal filed by Joe W. Louis. IFP DENIED 08/30/2018. (tp) |
| Mailed a copy of #3 Judgment - Sua Sponte (Complaint), to Joe W. Louis 23345-048 Federal Bureau of Prisons Devins Medical Center P.O. Box 879 Ayer, MA 01432. (vba) |
| Mailed a copy of #2 Order of Dismissal, to Joe W. Louis 23345-048 Federal Bureau of Prisons Devins Medical Center P.O. Box 879 Ayer, MA 01432. (vba) |
Filing 3
CIVIL JUDGMENT. IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the complaint is dismissed without prejudice under the Prison Litigation Reform Act's "three-strikes" rule. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). Plaintiff continues to be barred from filing any civil action under the in forma pauperis (IFP) statute while a prisoner unless Plaintiff is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the Court's judgment would not be taken in good faith. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court mail a copy of this judgment to Plaintiff and note service on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 8/30/2018) (rjm) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing 2
ORDER OF DISMISSAL UNDER 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). The Clerk of Court is directed to assign this matter to my docket, mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff, and note service on the docket. The Court denies Plaintiff's request to proceed IFP, and the complaint is dismissed without prejudice under the PLRA's "three-strikes" rule. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). Plaintiff remains barred from filing any future action IFP while in custody, unless he is under imminent threat of serious physical injury. Id. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 8/30/2018) (rjm) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
| NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT - SUA SPONTE to Judge Colleen McMahon. Judge Unassigned is no longer assigned to the case. (rjm) |
| Case Designated ECF. (rdz) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Israel, Netanyu, North Korea, Putkin, Trump, United Nations Security Council. Document filed by Joe W. Louis.(rdz) |
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 Southern 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.
