Murray v. Department of Defense
| Pamela DeBert Murray |
| Department of Defense and Paul Ney |
| 1:2022cv00063 |
| May 9, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Utah |
| Daphne A Oberg |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 13, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 Remark: Summons, Complaint, Order #7 and USM form 285 hand delivered to USMS on this date for service. Per plainitff's request, copies of same documents mailed to Attorney General and The Pentagon via certified mail. (alf) |
| Filing 9 **RESTRICTED DOCUMENT**Summons Issued as to Department of Defense. (alf) |
| Filing 8 CONSENT to Jurisdiction by US Magistrate Judge under 28 U.S.C. 636(c) by Plaintiff Pamela DeBert Murray. (alf) |
Filing 7
ORDER for Service of Process re #5 Complaint. The restriction on filing motions or other documents stated in the courts May 9, 2022 order #4 is VACATED. See order for instruction. Signed by Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg on 6/6/22. (alf)
|
| Filing 6 RECEIVED Consent/Reassignment Form from Plaintiff Pamela DeBert Murray. (mh) |
| Filing 5 COMPLAINT against Department of Defense and Paul Ney (Originally received by the court on 05/09/2022). (Fee Status: IFP) filed by Pamela DeBert Murray. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Administrative Remedies Log, #2 Civil Cover Sheet 1) Assigned to Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg (mh) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER granting #1 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis and and ORDERS as follows: 1. Because Ms. Murray is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the court will screen her complaint under 28 U.S.C. 1915(e) and Local Civil Rule DUCivR 3-2(b). 2. Ms. Murray may complete and return forms provided by the court. The clerks office is directed to provide Ms. Murray with the magistrate judge consent/reassignment form and the email filing and electronic notification form for unrepresented parties. 3. Other than court forms, Ms. Murray must not file any motions or other documents during the time the case is screened or until the court orders otherwise. If such documents are filed, they will be lodged on the docket and will not be addressed until screening is completed. 4. The time to serve the complaint is tolled until further order of the court. 5. If the action is allowed to proceed, the court will order service of process on the defendant(s). Signed by Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg on 05/09/2022. (mh) Modified on 5/9/2022 to include order text (mh).
|
| Filing 3 NOTICE to Pro Se Plaintiff - This case is assigned to a magistrate judge. To consent or request reassignment, use # the form on this link or use the included form for non-efilers and send it toconsents@utd.uscourts.govwithin 28 days or mail to the court with Attention: Consent Clerk on the envelope. Notice e-mailed or mailed to Plaintiff Pamela DeBert Murray. Form due by 6/6/2022. (alf) |
| Filing 2 DOCUMENTS LODGED consisting of Complaint, Administrative Remedies Log and Civil Cover Sheet. Note: attached document lodged for reference purposes only; no response required unless specifically ordered by the court. (Attachments: #1 Administrative Remedies Log, #2 Civil Cover Sheet)(mh) |
| Filing 1 **SEALED DOCUMENT** MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Assigned to Magistrate Judge Daphne A. Oberg for review, case file forwarded to Magistrate Judge. (Received by the court on: 05/09/2022) filed by Plaintiff Pamela DeBert Murray. (mh) |
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 Utah 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.
