Njos v. Argueta et al
| Scott Njos |
| S Argueta, S Prutzman, Hunter, D McClintock, W Brenneman, Kevin Pigos, A Edinger, S Gosa, F. Fasciana and Jon Doe |
| 3:2012cv01038 |
| June 1, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania |
| Scranton Office |
| Union |
| Edwin M. Kosik |
| Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| 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
262
ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that 1. The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Saporito (Doc. 255) is ADOPTED in its entirety.2. The Court ADOPTS the proposed findings of fact and conclusions oflaw as set forth by the Magistrate Judge within the Report andRecommendation. 4. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE the file on this case. 255 Signed by Honorable John E. Jones, III on 4/6/17. (sc)
|
|
Filing
216
ORDER: (1) The Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Joseph F. Saporito, Jr. dated August 31, 2015 (Doc. 213 ) is ADOPTED; (2) The Motion to Dismiss of Defendant Gemberling (Doc. 144 ) is GRANTED; (3) The Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Amen d His Complaint (Doc. 214 ) is GRANTED; (4) The Plaintiffs Verified Amended Complaint (Doc. 215 ) is ACCEPTED; and, (5) The above-captioned action is REMANDED to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Edwin M. Kosik on 9/22/2015. (emksec, )
|
|
Filing
191
MEMORANDUM (Order to follow as separate docket entry). Signed by Honorable Edwin M. Kosik on 05/26/2015. (emksec, )
|
|
Filing
131
ORDER (memorandum filed previously as separate docket entry). Clerk of Court is directed to add "Officer Prutzman #2" to the docket as a party Defendant. Clerk of court is directed to issue the summons and provide it to the U.S. Marshal and is directed to serve Plaintiff's Complaint (Doc. 1), in accordance with Rule 4 of the FRCP, upon Defendant Officer Prutzman #2 at USP-Lewisburg. Defendant Officer Prutzman #2 is requested to waive service pursuant to Rule 4(d) of the FRCP. After Defendant Officer Prutzman #2 has been served and responds to Plaintiff's Complaint, we will schedule the evidentiary hearing on the exhaustion issue as directed by the Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Blewitt on 10/22/14. (lh)
|
|
Filing
128
MEMORANDUM (Order to follow as separate docket entry)Signed by Honorable Edwin M. Kosik on 10/16/14. (lh)
|
|
Filing
92
MEMORANDUM (Order to follow as separate docket entry). We shall grant Defendants Argueta and Prutzman's Motion for Clarificationof our March 24, 2014 Order (Doc. 85), but we will not alter or amend our Doc. 83 Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas M. Blewitt on 4/23/14. (ms) Modified on 4/23/2014 (ms).
|
|
Filing
89
MEMORANDUM (Order to follow as separate docket entry)Signed by Honorable Edwin M. Kosik on 4/10/14. (lh)
|
|
Filing
80
MEMORANDUM (Order to follow as separate docket entry)Signed by Honorable Edwin M. Kosik on 3/20/14. (lh)
|
|
Filing
73
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ; denying 51 Motion for Protective Order; adopting 68 Report and Recommendations.Signed by Honorable Edwin M. Kosik on 8/6/13. (lh)
|
|
Filing
67
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 53 Report and Recommendations, 56 Objection to Report and Recommendations are OVERRULED, 6 Motion for TRO filed is DENIED; and ORDER REMANDED to the magistrate Judge for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Edwin M. Kosik on 4/10/13. (lh) Modified on 4/11/2013 (lh).
|
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 Middle 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.
