Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Rodriguez v. Amtrak

United States District Court, D. New Mexico

June 19, 2019

RODOLFO RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff,
v.
AMTRAK, J. PERRY, and C. CHAVEZ, Defendants.

          PRO SE PRISONER CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

          STEPHAN M. VIDMAR UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.

         THIS MATTER is before the Court sua sponte. The Court has received and docketed the civil rights Complaint filed pro se by Plaintiff Rodolfo Rodriguez on February 8, 2019. [Doc. 1]. Plaintiff must include the case number, 19-cv-0111 MV/SMV, on all papers filed in this proceeding.

         Plaintiff must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local Rules of this Court, and any order of the Court. Failure to comply with the Rules or Court orders may result in dismissal of this case or other sanctions. Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b); see Ogden v. San Juan Cty., 32 F.3d 452, 455 (10th Cir. 1994). Plaintiff is obligated to keep the Court advised of any changes in Plaintiff's mailing address. Failure to keep the Court informed of Plaintiff's correct address may also result in dismissal of the case or other sanctions. D.N.M.LR-Civ. 83.6.

         Because Plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se, the Court is obligated to conduct a preliminary screening of the Complaint. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (2018). Whenever a prisoner brings a civil action against government officials, the Court is obligated to screen the prisoner's complaint or petition. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Section 1915A states:

(a) Screening.-The court shall review, before docketing, if feasible or, in any event, as soon as practicable after docketing, a complaint in a civil action in which a prisoner seeks redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental entity.
(b) Grounds for dismissal.-On review, the court shall identify cognizable claims or dismiss the complaint, or any portion of the complaint, if the complaint-
(1) is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; or
(2) seeks monetary relief from a defendant who is immune from such relief.

28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a)-(b). The Court has a similar obligation to screen the complaint when a pro se plaintiff is proceeding without prepayment of fees and costs under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2):

Notwithstanding any filing fee, or any portion thereof, that may have been paid, the court shall dismiss the case at any time if the court determines that-
(A) the allegation of poverty is untrue; or
(B) the action or appeal-
(i) is frivolous or malicious;
(ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.