Rodriguez v. Smith
Eugenio Lopez Rodriguez |
K. Smith |
7:2023cv00105 |
September 28, 2023 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Texas |
Reed C O'Connor |
Prisoner Pet/Other: Civil Rights |
42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on November 9, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 6 JUDGMENT: It is ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Ordered by Judge Reed C. O'Connor on 11/9/2023) (bdb) |
Filing 5 ORDER DISMISSING CASE: This action is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for want of prosecution. (Ordered by Judge Reed C. O'Connor on 11/9/2023) (bdb) |
***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:5, 6. Thu Nov 9 12:19:32 CST 2023 (crt) |
Filing 4 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY AND ORDER: Eugenio Lopez Rodriguez must address the following deficiency - Movant has neither paid the Court's filing fee nor submitted a request to proceed in forma pauperis. Movant must either pay the $402.00 filing and administrative fees or submit a request to proceed in forma pauperis on the District Court's Application form along with a certified inmate trust account statement. 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 10/31/2023. (Ordered by Judge Reed C. O'Connor on 10/10/2023) (tjc) |
***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:4. Tue Oct 10 14:25:53 CDT 2023 (crt) |
***Clerk's Notice of delivery: (see NEF for details) Docket No:2, 3. Tue Oct 3 10:20:36 CDT 2023 (crt) |
Filing 3 Notice and Instruction to Pro Se Party. (bdb) |
Filing 2 New Case Notes: A filing fee has not been paid. File to: No court file needed. (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 (No magistrate judge assigned). Clerk to provide copy to plaintiff if not received electronically. (bdb) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against K. Smith filed by Eugenio Lopez Rodriguez. 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. (bdb) |
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
Search for this case: Rodriguez v. Smith | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Eugenio Lopez Rodriguez | |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: K. Smith | |
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.