Jones v. United States et al
Michael Anthony Jones |
United States, BOP Agency, Charles E. Samuels, Jr., J. F. Caraway, C. Eichenlaub, Terry O'Brien, W. Odom, Gregory S. Mims, II, Jamie Hamilton and C. Lafluer |
1:2015cv00050 |
March 20, 2015 |
US District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia |
Clarksburg Office |
Preston |
Irene M. Keeley |
Robert W. Trumble |
Prisoner: Civil Rights |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2671 Federal Tort Claims Act |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 190 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING-IN-PART AND DENYING-IN-PART PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION [DKT. NO. 175], AND VACATING-IN-PART ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [DKT. NO. 149] AND REOPENING THE CASE: The Court GRANTS-IN-PART and DENIES-IN-PART Jones motion for relief from judgment (Dkt. No. 175 ); GRANTS Jones motions for leave to supplement his Rule 60(b) motion (Dkt. Nos. 177 ; 178 ); DENIES as MOOT Jones motion for leave to supplement newly discovered evidence (Dkt. No . 184 ); VACATES-IN-PART its earlier Order insofar as it dismissed Jones FTCA claim (Dkt. No. 149 ) and REOPENS the case; GRANTS Jones LEAVE to secure and file a medical screeningcertificate of merit with the Court within ninety (90) days followin g entry of this Order; and REFERS this case to Magistrate Judge Trumble for furtherproceedings consistent with this Opinion, and also DIRECTS him to consider Jones motions for appointed counsel (Dkt. Nos. 176 ; 178 ). Signed by Senior Judge Irene M. Keeley on 5/16/18. (Attachments: # 1 Certified Mail Return Receipt)(jss) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- 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.