BALL v. TILLER et al
| KYION BALL |
| L.P.N. MICHELLE TILLER, PSHYCHIATRIST, ANY AND ALL JOHN/JANE DOE(S) and DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS |
| 2:2022cv01647 |
| November 21, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
| Lisa Pupo Lenihan |
| Prisoner Civil Rights (Prison Condition) |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 pr Prisoner Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 29, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 2
ORDER that the Clerk of Court is to mark this case CLOSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff may submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, along with a certified copy of the inmate account statement for the six (6) months preceding the filing of the complaint. If that motion is granted, the case will be reopened. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the plaintiff may reopen the case by paying the $402.00 filing fee. AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are allowed fourteen (14) days from this date to appeal this order to a district judge pursuant to Local Rule 72.C.2. Failure to appeal within fourteen (14) days may constitute waiver of the right to appeal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on 11/29/2022. (jmb)
|
| Filing 1 Remark: Complaint lodged without Motion for In Forma Pauperis or payment of filing fee (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 Envelope) (jma) |
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 Western 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.
