BRONSON et al v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE et al
| PURCELL BRONSON and BOBBY BRIGHTWELL |
| U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and U.S. POSTAL INSPECTION SERVICE |
| 3:2010cv00293 |
| November 18, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
| Johnstown Office |
| Clearfield |
| Kim R. Gibson |
| Keith A. Pesto |
| Prison Condition |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 |
| 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
4
MEMORANDUM ORDER denying 1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. It is further Ordered that Plaintiff may reopen this case by paying the full $350.00 filing fee with sixty (60) days. It is further Ordered that the Report and Recomme ndation (ECF No. 2 ) dated 11/22/2010, is adopted as the opinion of the Court. It is further Ordered that the Clerk of Court mark this case Closed. And it is further Ordered that pursuant to Rule 4(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Plaintiff has thirty (30) days to file a notice of appeal as provided by Rule 3 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, and as more fully stated in said Memorandum Order. Signed by Judge Kim R. Gibson on 12/17/2010. (dlg)
|
|
Filing
2
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that the 1 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by PURCELL BRONSON be denied. Objections to R&R due by 12/9/2010. Signed by Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on November 22, 2010. (far)
|
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.
