Abdulraman v. Burke et al
| Abdul Abdulraman |
| Larry Greene, State of Ohio, Edwin Voorhies, Donnie Morgan, Rules Infraction Board, Dirk Prise, Gary C. Mohr and Burke |
| 1:2012cv00209 |
| March 13, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Cincinnati Office |
| SCIOTO |
| Karen L. Litkovitz |
| S Arthur Spiegel |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
45
ORDER that plaintiff's 37 MOTION to Appoint Counsel is Denied. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that plaintiff's 14 32 MOTIONS for Default Judgment be Denied. The State of Ohio's 21 MOTION to Strike plaintiff's motion for def ault judgment be Denied as Moot. Defendant's 40 MOTION for Summary Judgment be Granted and plaintiff's claims be dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies. Any appeal of this matter would not be taken in good faith. ( Objections to R&R due by 2/22/2013). Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 2/4/2013. (art)
|
|
Filing
19
ORDER AND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 1 Complaint filed by Abdul Abdulraman by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovtiz. It is therefore RECOMMENDED that: Plaintiff's claims against defendants State of Ohio, Rules Infraction Board,Warden Don nie Morgan, and Larry Greene be DISMISSED on the ground that they fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. It is therefore ORDERED that: 1. The United States Marshal shall serve a copy of the Complaint , summons, the separate Order granting prisoner in forma pauperis status, and this Order and Report and Recommendation upon defendants Davis, Bell, Dillon, Workman, Holsinger, Jackson, Oppy, Southworth, York, Payne, Stunnabeck, Voorhies, Burke, Mohr and Prise, as directed by plaintiff.( Objections to R&R due by 6/4/2012). Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 5/16/12. (lk)
|
|
Filing
12
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that plaintiff's 1 Motion for preliminary injunctive relief is not warranted in this case. Accordingly, it is therefore Recommended that plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction be Denied. Objections to R&R due by 5/21/2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 5/1/2012. (art)
|
|
Filing
6
ORDER that plaintiff submit a response to defendants' 5 Response within (5) days setting forth why the Court should grant injunctive relief in this matter. The Clerk is directed to submit to plaintiff a copy of defendants' memorandum along with this Order. Plaintiff's response due by 4/13/2012. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 4/3/2012. (art)
|
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 Ohio 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.
