Gillard v. Pixley Brian
| Thomas Michael Allan Gillard |
| Brian Pixley |
| 3:2026cv00441 |
| March 6, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon |
| Mark D Clarke |
| Prisoner Petitions: Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 6, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254). Filed by Thomas Michael Allan Gillard against Brian Pixley. (sss) |
| Filing 8 Exhibits re Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 2254 #1 . Filed by Thomas Michael Allan Gillard. (jw) |
Filing 7
ORDER: The Court ORDERS Gillard to file an amended habeas petition curing the deficiencies noted in order within thirty days of the date of this order. The Court advises Gillard that if he does not file an amended petition within thirty days, this action will be dismissed. The Court DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to send Gillard a blank form petition for writ of habeas corpus with a copy of this order. The Court DENIES Gillard's Motion for Appointment of Counsel #6 with leave to renew if this case proceeds. Signed on 03/31/2026 by Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke. (Deposited in outgoing mail to pro se party on 03/31/2026.) (hm)
|
| Filing 6 Motion for Appointment of Counsel. Filed by Thomas Michael Allan Gillard. (Attachment: #1 Attachment) (et) |
| Filing 5 Application for Leave to Proceed IFP. Filed by Thomas Michael Allan Gillard. (et) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER: Petitioner's application does not include a certificate from an authorized officer demonstrating the amount of funds Petitioner currently has in any account at CCJ. The application therefore is incomplete. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Petitioner's Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis [ 2] and ORDERS him to file an amended application curing this deficiency within thirty days of the date of this order. The amended application must bear the Civil No. 3:26-cv-00441-CL. The Court advises Petitioner that his failure to file an amended application will result in the dismissal of this proceeding. Signed on 03/13/2026 by Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke. (Deposited in outgoing mail to pro se party on 03/13/2026.) (hm)
|
| Filing 3 Notice of Case Assignment: This case is assigned to Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke. (Deposited in outgoing mail to pro se party on 3/10/2026.) (le) |
| Filing 2 Application for Leave to Proceed IFP. Filed by Thomas Michael Allan Gillard. (le) |
| Filing 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2254 - State) (IFP Submitted). Filed by Thomas Michael Allan Gillard against Brian Pixley. (le) |
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
| Search for this case: Gillard v. Pixley Brian | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Thomas Michael Allan Gillard | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: Brian Pixley | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
