Meadows v. Health Department et al
| Joshua James Meadows |
| Health Department, City of Lubbock, State of Texas, CDC and BBB |
| 5:2025cv00239 |
| November 6, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
| James Wesley Hendrix |
| 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 December 19, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
JUDGMENT: For the reasons stated in the Court's order entered today, it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed that Plaintiff's civil-rights action is dismissed without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). (Ordered by Judge James Wesley Hendrix on 12/19/2025) (cjd)
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER: Plaintiff Joshua James Meadows is detained in the Lubbock County DetentionCenter, where he has quickly become a prolific and abusive litigant. Since July 17, 2025, Plaintiff has filed at least 29 pro se complaints in the Northern District of Texas, most of which are convoluted and difficult to follow. He filed this civil-rights complaint on the court-approved form, but much of the complaint is illegible and his grounds for relief are difficult to discern. He did not pay the filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP). However, as explained below, Plaintiff is ineligible to proceed IFP, and hiscomplaint must be dismissed. The Court concludes that Plaintiff cannot proceed with this civil action without prepayment of the filing fee. Because he has not done so, this action must be dismissed under Section 1915(g). The Court therefore orders: 1. Plaintiff's civil-rights action is dismissed without prejudice under 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). 2. If Plaintiff refiles this action, he must submit his complete complaint on the proper form and pay the $405 filing fee. (Ordered by Judge James Wesley Hendrix on 12/19/2025) (cjd)
|
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:6,7. Fri Dec 19 13:40:13 CST 2025 (crt) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Judicial Complaint filed by Joshua James Meadows. Copy of original correspondence and Clerk Response Letter mailed to Mr. Meadows. Mr. Meadows has been reminded that ANY and ALL correspondence sent to the Clerk must include specific case numbers. (Attachments: #1 Notice, #2 Correspondence Letter) (cjd) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE AND ELECTION REGARDING CONSENT TO PROCEED BEFORE A UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Joshua James Meadows. ***Plaintiff did NOT clearly consent in filing.*** (krr) |
| Filing 3 Notice and Instruction to Pro Se Party (krr) |
| Filing 2 New Case Notes: A filing fee has not been paid. (For court use only - links to the #national index and to the prior sanctions found within the #circuit index.) 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. (krr) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by Joshua James Meadows. 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. (krr) |
| ***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:1,2,3. Thu Nov 6 10:02:25 CST 2025 (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.
