BROWN v. U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION
Plaintiff: AMOS BROWN
Defendant: U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION
Case Number: 2:2009cv02907
Filed: June 29, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Office: Philadelphia Office
County: Philadelphia
Presiding Judge: GENE E.K. PRATTER
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
December 2, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOCKET NO. 9) AND GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS (DOCKET NO. 10). SIGNED BY HONORABLE GENE E.K. PRATTER ON 12/2/09. 12/2/09 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED AND E-MAILED.(rab)
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 Pennsylvania Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: BROWN v. U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: AMOS BROWN
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 [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION
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 [ Unicourt | 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.


Why Is My Information Online?