Hancock v. Federal Bureau of Investigation
Plaintiff: Patrick L. Hancock by Christopher Rick Montez and Patrick L. Hancock
Defendant: Federal Bureau of Investigation
Case Number: 5:2022cv01257
Filed: November 18, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Texas
Presiding Judge: Fred Biery
Referring Judge: Elizabeth S Chestney
Nature of Suit: Contract: Other
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Fed. Question
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on January 11, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
January 11, 2023 Filing 8 Certified Mail Receipt of #7 Report and Recommendations, (wg)
January 6, 2023 Filing 7 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re #1 Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Patrick L. Hancock. The United States District Clerk shall serve a copy of this report and recommendation on all parties by either (1) electronic transmittal to all parties represented by attorneys registered asa filing user with the clerk of court, or (2) by mailing a copy to those not registered by certified mail, return receipt requested. Signed by Judge Elizabeth S. Chestney. (wg)
January 6, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER RETURNING CASE BACK TO DISTRICT COURT, CASE NO LONGER REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Elizabeth S. Chestney. Signed by Judge Elizabeth S. Chestney. (wg)
December 20, 2022 Filing 5 ADVISORY TO THE COURT by Patrick L. Hancock. (wg)
December 14, 2022 Filing 4 ADVISORY TO THE COURT by Patrick L. Hancock. (wg)
November 30, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 It is ORDERED, that on or before December 23, 2023, Plaintiff shallfile a supplement to his Motion to Proceed IFP, explaining his financial status in more detail re #1 MOTION to Proceed in forma pauperis filed by Patrick L. Hancock, It is further ORDER FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT Statement due 12/23/2022. More Definite Statement of the claims he seeks to present to this Court. Signed by Judge Elizabeth S. Chestney. (wg)
November 18, 2022 Filing 2 Case Opening Letter to Patrick L. Hancock by Christopher Rick Montez. (dtg)
November 18, 2022 Filing 1 MOTION to Proceed in forma pauperis by Patrick L. Hancock by Christopher Rick Montez. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Complaint, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Proposed Summons). Motions referred to Judge Elizabeth S. Chestney. (dtg)
November 18, 2022 CASE REFERRED to Magistrate Judge Elizabeth S. Chestney. (dtg)
November 18, 2022 THIS CASE HAS BEEN RANDOMLY ASSIGNED TO JUDGE FRED BIERY. (dtg)

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hancock v. Federal Bureau of Investigation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Patrick L. Hancock by Christopher Rick Montez
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 ]
Plaintiff: Patrick L. Hancock
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: Federal Bureau of Investigation
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.


Why Is My Information Online?