SMITH v. SUPERINTENDENT MARSH et al
| JAMES SMITH |
| SUPERINTENDENT MARSH, RICKEY L. SHERMAN and SECURITY OFFICE |
| 3:2018cv00164 |
| August 22, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
| Kim R Gibson |
| Keith A Pesto |
| Prisoner Civil Rights (Prison Condition) |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 pr |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 23, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 2
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION and ORDER FOR STATISTICAL CLOSING re #1 complaint. The Clerk shall mark this matter administratively closed until plaintiff submits an inmate account statement. The Clerk shall re-open the matter upon receipt of the filing fee or a motion to proceed in forma pauperis with an inmate account statement; if plaintiff does not take steps to pay the filing fee this matter should be dismissed for failure to prosecute and if he does pay the filing fee or submits a valid in forma pauperis motion, the complaint is inadequate and would have to be amended and as more fully stated; ( Objections to R&R due by 9/6/2018, Objections to R&R for Unregistered ECF Users due by 9/10/2018), ORDER FOR STATISTICAL CLOSING. Signed by Magistrate Judge Keith A. Pesto on 8/23/2018. (plp)
|
| Filing 1 Complaint without filing fee or motion to proceed in forma pauperis received. (Attachments: #1 Envelope) (plp) |
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.
