Bravo v. Garland
Plaintiff: Luis Bravo
Defendant: Merrick Garland, John 1 Doe, John 2 Doe and U.S. Marshals Service
Case Number: 1:2022cv06736
Filed: August 8, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Barbara C Moses
Referring Judge: Gregory H Woods
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on July 26, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 23, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 11 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of Summons and Amended Complaint. U.S. Marshals Service, served on 9/20/2022, answer due 10/11/2022. Service was accepted by Lisa Dickinson, Gen. Counsel. Document filed by Luis Bravo. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1).(sc)
September 8, 2022 Opinion or Order SUMMONS ISSUED as to U.S. Marshals Service. (dsh)
September 7, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 10 (2nd)_ AMENDED COMPLAINT, re: amending #3 Amended Complaint against John 1 Doe, John 2 Doe, U.S. Marshals Service with JURY DEMAND.Document filed by Luis Bravo. Related document: #3 Amended Complaint. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1)(sc)
September 2, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 9 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE of Prelimnary Statement, served on U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland on 8/2522. Service was made by Cert. Mail. Document filed by Luis Bravo. (sc)
August 26, 2022 Opinion or Order MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 8. Mailed to: Luis Bravo 826 Columbus Avenue New York, NY 10026. (kh)
August 25, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 7 INFORMATION PACKAGE MAILED to Luis Bravo 826 Columbus Avenue New York, NY 10026, at, on 8/25/2022 Re: #5 Order of Service (Amended Complaint form attached). The following document(s) were enclosed in the Service Package: a copy of the order of service or order to answer and other orders entered to date, the individual practices of the district judge and magistrate judge assigned to your case, Instructions for Litigants Who Do Not Have Attorneys, Notice Regarding Privacy and Public Access to Electronic Case Files, a flyer about the free legal assistance clinic located in the Thurgood Marshall Courthouse (only in non prisoner cases), a Motions guide, a notice that the Pro Se Manual has been discontinued, a Notice of Change of Address form to use if your contact information changes, a handout explaining matters handled by magistrate judges and consent form to complete if all parties agree to proceed for all purposes before the magistrate judge, a form for you to complete if you consent to receive filings electronically (only in nonprisoner cases). (aan)
August 25, 2022 Opinion or Order Mailed a copy of #5 Order of Service, #3 Amended Complaint to United States Attorneys Office at: 86 Chambers Street, New York, New York 10007. (aan)
August 25, 2022 Opinion or Order MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 6. Mailed to: Luis Bravo 826 Columbus Avenue New York, NY 10026. (kh)
August 24, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER REGARDING GENERAL PRETRIAL MANAGEMENT: The above-titled action has been referred to Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses for general pretrial management, including scheduling, discovery, non-dispositive pretrial motions, and settlement, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(A). All pretrial motions and applications, including those related to scheduling and discovery (but excluding motions to dismiss or for judgment on the pleadings, for injunctive relief, for summary judgment, or for class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23), must be made to Judge Moses and in compliance with this Court's Individual Practices in Civil Cases, which are available on the Court's website at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-barbara-moses. Court conferences and hearings may be conducted by teleconference, videoconference, or in person. Teleconferences are held on the Court's AT&T line. If a teleconference is scheduled, the parties are directed to call (888) 557-8511 and enter the access code 7746387 a few minutes before the scheduled time. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to the plaintiff. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses on 8/24/2022) (rro)
August 24, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER REFERRING CASE TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE. Order that case be referred to the Clerk of Court for assignment to a Magistrate Judge for General Pretrial (includes scheduling, discovery, non-dispositive pretrial motions, and settlement). Referred to Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses. (Signed by Judge Gregory H. Woods on 8/24/2022) (rro)
August 23, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 5 VALENTIN ORDER: The Court dismisses without prejudice Plaintiff s claims against United States Attorney General Merrick Garland. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). The Clerk of Court is directed to add John Doe 1, USMS, and John Doe 2, USMS, as Defendants, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 21. This amendment is without prejudice to any defenses that these Defendants may wish to assert. The Clerk of Court is further directed to mail a copy of this order and the complaint to United States Attorneys Office at: 86 Chambers Street, New York, New York 10007.An amended complaint form is attached to this order. The Court certifies under 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. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue) . The Clerk of Court is also directed to mail an information package to Plaintiff.SO ORDERED., (John 1 Doe and John 2 Doe added. Merrick Garland (U.S. Attorney General) terminated.) (Signed by Judge Gregory H. Woods on 8/23/22) (yv) Transmission to Pro Se Assistants for processing. Modified on 9/13/2022 (yv).
August 23, 2022 Opinion or Order NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT to Judge Gregory H. Woods. Judge Laura Taylor Swain is no longer assigned to the case. (aea)
August 23, 2022 Opinion or Order Magistrate Judge Barbara C. Moses is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (aea)
August 17, 2022 Opinion or Order Pro Se Payment of Fee Processed: $402.00 Credit Card processed by the Finance Department on 08/17/2022, Receipt Number 4590. (stt)
August 17, 2022 Opinion or Order SUMMONS ISSUED as to United States Attorney General Merrick Garland on 8/17/22. (kh)
August 16, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 AMENDED COMPLAINT, re: amending #1 Complaint against Merrick Garland with JURY DEMAND.Document filed by Luis Bravo. Related document: #1 Complaint. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1)(sc)
August 10, 2022 Opinion or Order MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 2. Mailed to: Luis Bravo 826 Columbus Avenue New York, NY 10026. (kh)
August 9, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER DIRECTING PAYMENT OF FEE OR IFP APPLICATION: Plaintiff is directed to render payment of the filing fee or submit an IFP application to this Court's Pro Se Office within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. The Clerk of Court is directed to assign this matter to my docket. 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 in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). Filing Fee due by 9/8/2022. In Forma Pauperis (IFP) Application due by 9/8/2022. (Signed by Judge Laura Taylor Swain on 8/9/2022) (sha)
August 9, 2022 Opinion or Order NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT - SUA SPONTE to Judge Laura Taylor Swain. Judge Unassigned is no longer assigned to the case. (laq)
August 8, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Merrick Garland. Document filed by Luis Bravo. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit - Main Document) (sac)
August 8, 2022 Opinion or Order Case Designated ECF. (sac)

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 this case: Bravo v. Garland
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Luis Bravo
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 ]
Defendant: Merrick Garland
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 ]
Defendant: John 1 Doe
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 ]
Defendant: John 2 Doe
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 ]
Defendant: U.S. Marshals Service
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.


Why Is My Information Online?