Alford v. Bridenstine et al
| Carlos A. Alford |
| Jim Bridenstine and Christina Paulson |
| 7:2021cv00211 |
| December 10, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina |
| Louise Wood Flanagan |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 2, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 Document: Proposed Amended Complaint filed by Carlos A. Alford. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Summons Bill Nelson - NASA Administrator, #2 Proposed Summons Christine Paulen, #3 Proposed Summons Jim Brienstine, #4 Envelope) (Collins, S.) |
| Filing 6 Second Amended MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Carlos A. Alford. - {Not signed} (Attachments: #1 Proposed Complaint, #2 Exhibit Letter from Christine Paulsen, #3 Exhibit Letter to US Office of Personnel Management, #4 Exhibit Letter from Mark Enterline, #5 Envelope) (Collins, S.) |
| Motion Referred to US Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr regarding #6 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. (Collins, S.) |
| Filing 5 Amended MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Carlos A. Alford. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Summons Brienstine, #2 Proposed Summons Johnson Space Center - NASA, #3 Envelope) (Collins, S.) |
| Filing 4 Financial Disclosure Statement filed by Carlos A. Alford. (Collins, S.) |
| Motions Referred to US Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr regarding #5 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, #1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. (Collins, S.) |
| Notice of Pro Se E-Noticing - Pro se party has consented to receiving electronic service of all motions, notices, orders, and documents in civil cases in the Eastern District of North Carolina. All documents filed in CM-ECF will be served on this party via email pursuant to Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Civil Rule 5.1. (Collins, S.) |
Filing 3
ORDER OF DEFICIENCY - Plaintiff is DIRECTED to correct the deficiencies listed above and return the corrected documents within fourteen (14) days from the filing of this order. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 12/14/2021. A copy of this Order with blank forms was sent via US mail to Carlos A. Alford, 126 Trombay Drive, Wilmington, NC 28412 (Collins, S.)
|
| NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY - Failure to File Financial Disclosure Statement as to Carlos A. Alford. Pursuant to 7.1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Civil Rule 7.3, all parties shall file a financial disclosure statement. A negative statement is required if a party has no disclosures to make. The disclosure statement must be on a form provided by the clerk. This form is available at the clerk's office and on the court's website. (Rudd, D.) |
| Filing 2 Notice of Self-Representation filed by Carlos A. Alford. (Rudd, D.) |
| Filing 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, filed by Carlos A. Alford. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Complaint, #2 Exhibit Copy of federal job preferences for veterans, #3 Exhibit Copies of Various Certificates, #4 Exhibit Letter to the U.S. Office of Personal Mangement dated 12/4/2021, #5 Exhibit Copies of cases, #6 Exhibit Copy of Online Nonimmigrant Visa Application, #7 Exhibit Paralegal Information, #8 Civil Cover Sheet, #9 USM 285 Process Receipt and Returns, #10 Envelope) (Rudd, D.) |
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.
- 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.
