Barrett v. Campos et al
| David Barrett |
| Scott B. Allen, ELizabeth Campos, Linda Davidson and Regional Director Ronald K. Hooks |
| 3:2014cv02047 |
| December 29, 2014 |
| US District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Portland (3) Office |
| John Jelderks |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 Civil Rights |
| 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
6
Findings & Recommendation and Order: Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis 2 is GRANTED. Plaintiff's motion for appointment of pro bono counsel 3 is DENIED. This action should be DISMISSED without service of proc ess for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. A judgment should be entered dismissing the action without prejudice and with leave to file an amended complaint, curing the deficiencies noted above, within thirty days of the date of the Order. This Findings and Recommendation will be referred to a district judge. Objections, if any, to the Findings and Recommendation are due by 1/20/2015. If no objections are filed, then the Findings and Recommendation will go under advisem ent on that date. If objections are filed, then a response is due within 14 days after being served with a copy of the objections. When the response is due or filed, whichever date is earlier, the Findings and Recommendation will go under advisement. Signed on 12/31/2014 by Magistrate Judge John Jelderks. (jtj)
|
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.
