Hamner v. Ruth et al
| Mitchell C. Hamner |
| Lonnie Ruth, Dana Bailey and Kendra Pinkham |
| 2:2025cv00513 |
| March 26, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Michael W Mosman |
| Prisoner: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 19, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
JUDGMENT: IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that this Action is DISMISSED, with prejudice. Pending motions, if any, are DENIED AS MOOT. This Court certifies that any appeal from this Judgment would not be taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3); Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3)(A). Signed on 6/19/2025 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (Deposited in outgoing mail to pro se party on 6/20/2025.) (kms)
|
|
Filing 11
ORDER TO DISMISS: Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (#10) is dismissed, with prejudice, for failure to state aclaim upon which relief can be granted. Additionally, for the reasons set forth above, this Courtcertifies that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3); Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3)(A). Signed on 6/19/2025 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (Deposited in outgoing mail to pro se party on 6/20/2025.) (kms)
|
| Filing 10 Amended Complaint. Filed by Mitchell C. Hamner against All Defendants. (hm) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER TO DISMISS: Based on the foregoing, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's Complaint (#1 ) is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim. Should Plaintiff wish to continue with this case, he must file an amended complaint within 30 days that: (1) cures the deficiencies with his prior Complaint; (2) names all Defendants in its caption; (3) describes how each named Defendant personally participated the Eighth Amendment deprivation he describes; (4) does not incorporate any prior document by reference; and (5) is on the form provided by the Court. Plaintiffs failure to do so will result in the dismissal of this case with prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to send Plaintiff a civil rights form for his use. Signed on 5/15/25 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (Order and blank civil rights form deposited in outgoing mail to pro se party on 5/15/25.) (sb)
|
|
Filing 8
ORDER: Denying Motion for Appointment of Counsel #3 . Signed on 5/15/25 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (Deposited in outgoing mail to pro se party on 5/15/25.) (sb)
|
|
Filing 7
ORDER: Granting Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis #2 and to Collect Inmate Filing Fee. IT IS ORDERED that the Oregon Department of Corrections, Central Trust Unit, shall collect payments from the trust account of Plaintiff and shall forward those payments to the Clerk of the Court. A copy of this order has been emailed to the Central Trust Unit. Signed on 5/15/25 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (Deposited in outgoing mail to pro se party on 5/15/25.) (sb)
|
| Filing 6 Notice of Change of Address. Filed by Mitchell C. Hamner. (hm) |
| Filing 5 Notice of Case Assignment: This case is assigned to Judge Michael W. Mosman. (Deposited in outgoing mail to pro se party on 3/26/25.) (eo) |
| Filing 4 Exhibit. Filed by Mitchell C. Hamner. (eo) |
| Filing 3 Motion for Appointment of Counsel. Filed by Mitchell C. Hamner. (eo) |
| Filing 2 Application for Leave to Proceed IFP. Filed by Mitchell C. Hamner. (eo) |
| Filing 1 Complaint. (IFP Submitted). Filed by Mitchell C. Hamner against All Defendants (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet). (eo) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Oregon 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.
