Robert C. Denham, Jr. v. James Dzurenda, Director, Nevada Department of Corrections, et al.
SocialSecurity DueProcess Jurisdiction JusticiabilityDoctri
Is whether or not Plaintiffs Reply Motions Affidavit to Screening Order dated 01-09-19 was timely, and satisfied the $75,000 amount-in-controversy requirement pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1332(a)(1), to File Amended Complaint?
Questions Presented” Is Intended To:Ptesent The Reasons For.Granting The Petition: (a): L Is. whether or not Plaintiffs. Reply. Motions? Affidavit to Screening Order dated 01-09-19 was timely, and satisfied the $75, 000 requirement pursuant to 28 U.S:C.'§1332(a)(1), to File Amended Complaint? (Id Appx “E, El, E2”). IL Is whether or not Plaintiff's Motion to proceed informa ~. pauperis pursuant 28 U.S.C. § 1915; to Proposed:Amended:_ Plaintiff's 42 U.S.C. § 1983,1985(2) Civil Rights Complaint, ‘was given.an opportunity to -heard-on subject-matter jurisdiction? . (Id Appx “E”) , 2