Kuplen v. US Department of Justice et al
Plaintiff: |
John Edward Kuplen |
Defendant: |
US Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation |
Case Number: |
3:2013cv00343 |
Filed: |
June 4, 2013 |
Court: |
US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina |
Office: |
Charlotte Office |
County: |
XX, Outside State |
Presiding Judge: |
Frank D. Whitney |
Nature of Suit: |
Prisoner: Civil Rights |
Cause of Action: |
Prisoner Civil Rights |
Jury Demanded By: |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Date Filed |
Document Text |
January 12, 2022 |
Filing
62
ORDER denying 61 Motion for Relief from Order Pursuant to Rule 60 (b)(6). Signed by District Judge Frank D. Whitney on 1/12/22. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(clc)
|
October 21, 2021 |
Filing
60
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 57 Motion for Refund of Overpaymentfor relief from the Clerks Order directing prison officials to deduct monthly filing fee payments; granting in part and denying in part 59 Motion for Refund of Overpaymentfor relief from the Clerks Order directing prison officials to deduct monthly filing fee payments. Signed by District Judge Frank D. Whitney on 10/20/21. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(clc)
|
August 17, 2021 |
Filing
56
ORDER denying without prejudice 55 Motion for refund of overpayment of filing fee. Signed by District Judge Frank D. Whitney on 8/16/21. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(clc)
|
May 18, 2021 |
Filing
54
ORDER denying 53 Motion Request to Pay Off Balance. Signed by District Judge Frank D. Whitney on 5/17/21. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(clc)
|
April 13, 2015 |
Filing
52
ORDER denying 51 Motion for Reconsideration re 43 Order on Motion to Dismiss/Failure to State a Claim. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 4/13/2015. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(eef)
|
March 27, 2015 |
Filing
50
ORDER granting 49 Motion for access to the courts cited unpublished opinions. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 3/27/2015. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.) (tmg)
|
March 9, 2015 |
Filing
44
CLERK'S JUDGMENT is hereby entered in accordance with the Court's Order dated 3/9/2015. Signed by Clerk, Frank G. Johns. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(eef)
|
July 3, 2014 |
Filing
21
ORDER re 20 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of proper or sufficient service. The Clerk of this Court shall mail two summons forms to Plaintiff for service on Defendants FBI and the U.S. Attorney for the Western Distr ict of North Carolina. Plaintiff shall have 20 days from service of this order to return the summonses to the Court for service by the U.S. Marshal. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 7/3/2014. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(eef)
|
June 11, 2014 |
Filing
19
ORDER that Defendant United States shall, within twenty (20) days of this Order, file an Answer or responsive pleading, or submit to the Court an explanation as to why the Government has not answered re 1 Complaint. US Department of Justice answer due 7/2/2014.. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 6/10/2014. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(eef)
|
January 24, 2014 |
Filing
13
ORDER that the U.S. Marshal shall again attempt to serve Defendants with the summonses provided by Plaintiff in accordance with Rule 4(j) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure re 9 Summons Issued. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 1/24/2014. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(eef)
|
October 2, 2013 |
Filing
8
ORDER directing the U.S. Marshal to serve Defendants in accordance with Rule 4(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 10/2/2013. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(eef)
|
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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
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?