Barbour v. Guerra et al
| Brandon Barbour |
| FNU Guerra, FNU Hansen, FNU Laycock, FNU Booth, FNU Simmons, James Hansen, FNU Porter and Stevens Gailey |
| 2:2025cv00166 |
| March 5, 2025 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Utah |
| Dustin B Pead |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 4, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
RECEIVED Consent/Reassignment Form from Plaintiff Brandon Barbour. (mh)
|
|
Filing 6
NOTICE: The court received a bounce-back notification indicating that the primary email address [email protected] and secondary email [email protected], for plaintiff Brandon Barbour are invalid. Parties must maintain valid and current contact information with the court. Consistent with the CM/ECF Procedures Manual, the court has inactivated the parties efiling and electronic notification privileges. When the party updates their contact information with the court, the court will reactivate their electronic notification privileges. Pro se parties must file a new Email Filing and Electronic Notification Form. (nl)
|
|
Filing 5
ORDER temporarily granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. 1915 and Local Civil Rule DUCivR 3-2 (b). The court will screen the complaint. The clerks office is directed to provide Plaintiff with the magistrate judge consent / reassignment form as well as the email filing and electronic notification form for unrepresented parties. Plaintiff may complete and return forms provided by the court. Other than court forms, Plaintiff may not file any motions or other documents while the case is screened or until the court orders otherwise. If such documents or motions are filed, they will be lodged on the docket and will not be addressed until screening is The time to serve the complaint is tolled until further order of the court. If the action is allowed to proceed, the court will enter an order authorizing service of process on the defendants. Signed by Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead on 03/06/2025. (sg)
|
|
Filing 4
NOTICE OF PRESIDING MAGISTRATE JUDGE ASSIGNMENT - This case is assigned to a magistrate judge. Under 28 U.S.C. 636(c), Fed. R. Civ. P. 73, and DUCivR 72-3, you are hereby notified that a magistrate judge for the District of Utah may conduct any or all proceedings in this case, including a jury or bench trial and entry of a final judgment. Exercise of this jurisdiction by the magistrate judge is permitted only if all parties voluntarily sign and return the form. To consent, return the Consent Form to the clerk's office within 21 days via email at [email protected] or mail to the address on the form. Please do not efile the Consent Form in the case. Notice emailed or mailed to Plaintiff Brandon Barbour. Form due by 3/27/2025. (mh)
|
|
Filing 3
NOTICE of Email Filing and Notification Form by Brandon Barbour. (sg)
|
|
Filing 2
**SEALED DOCUMENT** MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Assigned to Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead for review, case file forwarded to Magistrate Judge. (Received by the court on: 03/05/2025) filed by Plaintiff Brandon Barbour. (sg)
|
|
Filing 1
COMPLAINT against FNU Booth, Stevens Gailey, FNU Guerra, FNU Hansen, James Hansen, FNU Laycock, FNU Porter, FNU Simmons (Originally received by the court on 03/05/2025). (Fee Status: PENDING IFP) filed by Brandon Barbour. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet ) Assigned to Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead (sg)
|
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 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.
