KENNEDY v. ROMANO et al
| EDWARD THOMAS KENNEDY |
| JOHN KOSKINEN, NANCY B. ROMANO, BRUCE K. MENEELY, MEGAN J. BRENNAN, THOMAS J. MARSHALL, BRIAN S. JONES, MARK W. EVERSON, HARRY J. NEGRO, DAVID J. KAUTTER, WILLIAM M. PAUL, STEVEN TERNER MNUCHIN, DOUGLAS H. SHULMAN, IRS OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL and CHARLES O. ROSSOTTI |
| 5:2018cv03648 |
| August 24, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| EDWARD G SMITH |
| P.I.: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 27, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 NOTICE and SUSPENSION by EDWARD THOMAS KENNEDY, Certificate of Service. (DT) |
Filing 6
ORDER OF 9/24/2018 THAT AFTER CONSIDERING THE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS AND PROPOSED COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PRO SE PLAINTIFF, EDWARD THOMAS KENNEDY (DOC. NOS. 1,2) AND FOR THE REASONS SET FORTH IN THE SEPARATELY FILED MEMORANDUM OPINION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: THE APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS (DOC. NO. 1) IS GRANTED AND THE PLAINTIFF HAS LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS; THE COMPLAINT (DOC. NO. 2) IS DEEMED FILED; THE COMPLAINT IS DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR LACK OF SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION; THE PLAINTIFF HAS LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS ORDER IN THE EVENT THAT HE CAN SET FORTH ALLEGATIONS SUPPORTING A CLAIM WITHIN THIS COURT'S JURISDICTION. ANY AMENDED COMPLAINT MUST IDENTIFY THE DEFENDANTS IN THE CAPTION IN ADDITION TO THE BODY OF THE COMPLAINT, AND SHALL STATE THE BASIS FOR THE PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS AGAINST EACH DEFENDANT. UPON THE FILING OF AN AMENDED COMPLAINT, THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL NOT MAKE SERVICE UNTIL SO ORDERED BY THE COURT; THE CLERK OF COURT IS DIRECTED TO PROVIDE THE PLAINTIFF WITH A BLANK COPY OF THIS COURT'S STANDARD FORM TO BE USED BY A PRO SE LITIGANT FILING A CIVIL ACTION BEARING THE ABOVE-CAPTIONED CIVIL ACTION NUMBER. THE PLAINTIFF MAY USE THIS FORM TO FILE HIS AMENDED COMPLAINT; IF THE PLAINTIFF FAILS TO TIMELY FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT AS DIRECTED IN PARAGRAPH 4 OF THIS ORDER, THE COURT MAY DISMISS THIS CASE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE TO HIM; AND TO THE EXTENT THAT KENNEDY HAS REQUESTED CM/ECF ACCESS IN PARAGRAPH 3 OF THE COMPLAINT AND IN HIS DOCUMENT TITLED "TAKE JUDICIAL COGNIZANCE" (DOC. NO.4), THE REQUEST IS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. ETC. SIGNED BY JUDGE: EDWARD G. SMITH. 9/24/2018 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED AND MAILED TO PRO SE PLAINTIFF WITH FORMS. (DT) Modified on 10/1/2018 (dt, ).
|
| Filing 5 MEMORANDUM OPINION OF 9/24/2018. SIGNED BY HONORABLE EDWARD G. SMITH ON 09/24/2018. 09/24/2018 ENTERED AND COPIES E-MAILED AND MAILED TO PRO SE PLAINTIFF.(DT) |
| Filing 4 TAKE JUDICIAL COGNIZANCE by EDWARD THOMAS KENNEDY. (er, ) |
| Filing 3 PRO SE NOTICE RE:GUIDELINES. (er, ) |
| Filing 2 COMPLAINT against MEGAN J. BRENNAN, MARK W. EVERSON, IRS OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL, BRIAN S. JONES, DAVID J. KAUTTER, JOHN KOSKINEN, THOMAS J. MARSHALL, BRUCE K. MENEELY, STEVEN TERNER MNUCHIN, HARRY J. NEGRO, WILLIAM M. PAUL, NANCY B. ROMANO, CHARLES O. ROSSOTTI, DOUGLAS H. SHULMAN, filed by EDWARD THOMAS KENNEDY.(er, ) |
| Filing 1 MOTION TO PROCEED IN DISTRICT COURT WITHOUT PREPAYING FEES OR COSTS filed by EDWARD THOMAS KENNEDY. (er, ) (Main Document 1 replaced on 8/29/2018) (er, ). |
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 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.
