Rask v. Mitchell et al
| Brenda Mitchell and Carla LNU |
| Craig H Rask |
| 4:2021cv01105 |
| October 1, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Reed C O'Connor |
| Hal R Ray |
| Civil Rights: Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 29, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 11
FINAL JUDGMENT: It is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that: 1. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice. 2. The taxable costs of court, as calculated by the clerk of court, shall be borne by the party incurring the same. (Ordered by Judge Reed C. O'Connor on 11/29/2021) (sre)
|
|
Filing 10
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE: The United States Magistrate Judge made Findings, Conclusions, and a Recommendation in this case #9 . No objections were filed, and the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation is ripe for review. The District Judge reviewed the proposed Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the undersigned District Judge believes that the Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and they are accepted as the Findings and Conclusions of the Court. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that this action #1 is DISMISSED without prejudice. (Ordered by Judge Reed C. O'Connor on 11/29/2021) (sre)
|
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:10,11. Mon Nov 29 10:25:24 CST 2021 (crt) |
|
Filing 9
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE: Defendants have neither served an answer nor a motion for summary judgment in this case. Thus, Plaintiff is entitled to voluntarily dismiss his case without a court order under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Id. Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that United States District Judge Reed OConnor DISMISS this action WITHOUT PREJUDICE. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Hal R. Ray, Jr on 11/8/2021) (twd)
|
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:9. Mon Nov 8 14:58:38 CST 2021 (crt) |
| Filing 8 MOTION to Withdraw filed by Craig H Rask. (sre) |
|
Filing 7
SHOW CAUSE ORDER: It is ORDERED that Rask file a response containing a written statement of his position concerning this Court's Show Cause Order on or before November 12, 2021. Failure to comply with this order may result in a recommendation that Rask's case be dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Hal R. Ray, Jr on 10/12/2021) (bdb)
|
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:7. Tue Oct 12 13:34:26 CDT 2021 (crt) |
|
Filing 6
ORDER: Plaintiff is GRANTED leave to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915. The clerk shall file Plaintiffs pleadings without prepayment of costs or security therefor. Service of process shall be withheld pending judicial screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2).No amendments or supplements to the complaint shall be filed without prior Court approval or order. A complete amended complaint shall be attached to any motion to amend. All discovery in this case is stayed until Defendants are ordered to answer by the Court. Notice is hereby given to the Defendants that, at any time during this proceeding, Defendants may file a motion in opposition to Plaintiffs further proceeding in forma pauperis if, in the opinion of the Defendants, such motion is well taken and is filed in good faith.Plaintiff shall notify the Court of any change of address by filing a written Notice of Change of Address with the Clerk. Failure to file such notice may result in this case being dismissed for want of prosecution. (Ordered by Magistrate Judge Hal R. Ray, Jr on 10/5/2021) (sre)
|
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:6. Tue Oct 5 11:39:28 CDT 2021 (crt) |
| Filing 5 Notice and Instruction to Pro Se Party. (sre) |
| Filing 4 New Case Notes: A filing fee has not been paid. CASREF case referral set (see Special Order 3). Magistrate Judge Ray preliminarily assigned. No prior sanctions found. (For court use only - links to the #national and #circuit indexes.) File to: Appropriate Staff Attorney. Pursuant to Misc. Order 6, Plaintiff is provided the Notice of Right to Consent to Proceed Before A U.S. Magistrate Judge. Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. Attorneys are further reminded that, if necessary, they must comply with Local Rule 83.10(a) within 14 days or risk the possible dismissal of this case without prejudice or without further notice. Motion(s) referred to Magistrate Judge Hal R. Ray, Jr. (sre) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS/DISCLOSURE STATEMENT by Craig H Rask. (sre) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Craig H Rask. (sre) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Carla LNU, Brenda Mitchell filed by Craig H Rask. Unless exempted, attorneys who are not admitted to practice in the Northern District of Texas must seek admission promptly. Forms, instructions, and exemption information may be found at www.txnd.uscourts.gov, or by clicking here: # Attorney Information - Bar Membership. If admission requirements are not satisfied within 21 days, the clerk will notify the presiding judge. (sre) |
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:4,5. Fri Oct 1 15:44:24 CDT 2021 (crt) |
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 Texas Northern 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.
