Boykin v. Builders NAB LLC et al
| Torey Boykin |
| Builders NAB LLC, Builders Bank and FDIC |
| 4:2026cv00516 |
| April 28, 2026 |
| U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| Mark Pittman |
| Prisoner Pet/Other: Civil Rights |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 9, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
FINAL JUDGMENT: In accordance with the Court's #6 order of dismissal entered this day and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, it is the final judgment of the Court that Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 6/9/2026) (jnp)
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER: Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 6/9/2026) (jnp)
|
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:6, 7. Tue Jun 9 14:31:11 CDT 2026 (crt) |
|
Filing 5
ORDER: Torey Boykin must address the following deficiency: either pay $405 to the clerk of Court or file an IFP application on the required form, accompanied by a certificate of inmate trust account; and (2) file an amended complaint on the required form. Failure to comply with this order may lead to dismissal for failure to prosecute pursuant to FRCvP 41(b). Deadline to cure the deficiency is 30 days. Boykin's one-page #4 motion for partial summary judgment is DENIED without prejudice as premature. (Ordered by Judge Mark Pittman on 4/29/2026) (saw) Modified linkage to motion on 4/30/2026 (jnp).
|
| Filing 4 MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment filed by Torey Boykin (saw) |
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:5. Wed Apr 29 15:00:14 CDT 2026 (crt) |
| Filing 3 Notice and Instruction to Pro Se Party (jnp) |
| Filing 2 New Case Notes: A filing fee has not been paid. 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. All counsel and unrepresented parties are also reminded of the judge-specific requirement that they read and abide by (1) Dondi Properties Corp. v. Commerce Savings & Loan Assoc., 121 F.R.D. 284 (N.D. Tex. 1988);(2) the Local Civil Rules of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas;(3) the Texas Lawyers Creed;(4) the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct;and (5) Judge-Specific Requirements of Judge Pittman. (jnp) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Builders Bank, Builders NAB LLC, FDIC filed by Torey Boykin. 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. (jnp) |
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:2, 3. Tue Apr 28 15:11:06 CDT 2026 (crt) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
