VANG v. THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
KENG VANG |
THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA |
1:2019cv00920 |
September 9, 2019 |
US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina |
L PATRICK AULD |
WILLIAM L OSTEEN |
Prisoner: Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on October 15, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 4 JUDGMENT signed by JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN, JR on 10/15/2019 adopting the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation #2 ; that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1455(b)(4), Plaintiff's criminal case is remanded to the General Court of Justice, Superior Court Division, Rowan County, North Carolina. FURTHER that Plaintiff's document, (Doc. #1 ), is construed as a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983, and that, to the extent that Plaintiff's filing may be an attempt at a civil or habeas corpus action in this court, this action is hereby dismissed without prejudice to Plaintiff filing a new complaint or habeas petition, on the proper forms, correcting the defects set out in the Order and Recommendation. (Sheets, Jamie) |
CASE REFERRED re: #2 RECOMMENDED RULING - MAGISTRATE JUDGE re #1 Complaint filed by KENG VANG, to JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN, JR. (Welch, Kelly) |
Filing 3 Notice of Mailing Recommendation: Objections to R&R due by 10/1/2019. Objections to R&R for Pro Se due by 10/4/2019. (Garland, Leah) |
Filing 2 ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 09/17/2019, that in forma pauperis status is granted for the sole purpose of entering this Order and Recommendation. The Clerk is instructed to send Plaintiff 1983 forms, instructions, an application to proceed in forma pauperis, and a copy of pertinent parts of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 (i.e., Sections (a) & (d)). IT IS RECOMMENDED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1455(b)(4), Plaintiff's criminal case be remanded to the General Court of Justice, Superior Court Division, Rowan County, North Carolina. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that, to the extent that Plaintiff's filing may be an attempt at a civil or habeas corpus action in this Court, the action be dismissed sua sponte without prejudice to Plaintiff filing a new complaint or habeas petition, on the proper forms, which corrects the defects cited above. (Garland, Leah) |
ORDER signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 09/17/2019. (Garland, Leah) |
CASE REFERRED for Screening. (Garland, Leah) |
Case ASSIGNED to JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN, JR and MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD. (Garland, Leah) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, filed by KENG VANG. (Attachments: #1 Envelope - Front and Back) (Garland, Leah) |
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 North Carolina Middle 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
Search for this case: VANG v. THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA | |
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 ] |
Plaintiff: KENG VANG | |
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.