No. 18-9569
Joel Marvin Munt v. Tom Roy, et al.
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-procedure civil-rights constitutional-challenge due-process judicial-recusal petition-for-appeal plra pro-se-litigation recusal standing three-strikes tro
Key Terms:
Securities Jurisdiction
Securities Jurisdiction
Latest Conference:
2019-10-01
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Can denial of a Rule 5 Petition for Permission to Appeal be a strike under the PLRA?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. Can denial of a Rule 5 Petition for Permission to Appeal be a strike under the PLRA? 2. Should Petitioner have received a strike for the denial of his Petition for Permission to Appeal? 3. Is the PLRA’s Three Strikes provision Constitutional? 4. When is the correct time and in what manner should mandatory recusal be raised when the Judge refuses to recuse herself? 5. Should a TRO have issued? \ doel Marvin Munat
Docket Entries
2019-10-07
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of certiorari is dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As the petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petitions in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and the petition is submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See Martin v. District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 506 U. S. 1 (1992) (per curiam).
2019-07-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-06-19
Waiver of right of respondents Commissioner Paul Schnell, et al. to respond filed.
2019-05-23
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 8, 2019)
Attorneys
Commissioner Paul Schnell, et al.