Piatt v. Nooth et al
| Brian Scott Piatt |
| Jamie Miller, Mark Nooth, L. Wilson, Brad Cain and John Richardson |
| F. Serrano |
| 3:2010cv00932 |
| August 9, 2010 |
| US District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Portland Office |
| Habeas Corpus (Prison Condition) |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 10, 2014. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 180
Amended Order. The Court GRANTS Plaintiff's "Motion for Late Filing in Response to Show Cause Order" 176 . Because Plaintiff's response to the Order to Show Cause does not establish service of process was effected on Defendant John Richardson within the time provided by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), Plaintiff's claims against Defendant John Richardson are hereby DISMISSEDwithout prejudice. The Order 178 entered by this Court on February 26, 2014,is hereby STRICKEN from the record and superseded by this Amended Order as it contained an error in the Defendant's name. Signed on 03/10/2014 by Judge Anna J. Brown.See attached 3 page Amended Order. (bb)
|
|
Filing 172
Opinion and Order: For the reasons stated in the attached Opinion and Order, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment 140 . Signed on 01/17/2014 by Judge Anna J. Brown. See attached 20 page Opinion and Order for full text. (bb)
|
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 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.
