No. 21-6773
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw HabeasCorpus Punishment Privacy
AdministrativeLaw HabeasCorpus Punishment Privacy
Latest Conference:
2022-05-26
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the Court Error in ruling that the 'complaint failed to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
Questions Presented for Review 1. Did the Court Error in ruling that "the ‘complaint failed to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a)? : 2. Did the Court Error in ruling that "Plaintiff, instead . makes several conclusory, fantastical, and nonsensical allegations, which are insufficient to state a constitution claim, in light of : the FACT that on December 30, 2020 (
Docket Entries
2022-05-31
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner DENIED.
2022-05-10
Motion DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/26/2022.
2022-04-28
Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed by petitioner.
2022-02-28
The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is denied, and the petition for a writ of mandamus is dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
2022-02-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/25/2022.
2022-01-14
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2021-12-13
Petition for a writ of mandamus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 7, 2022)
Attorneys
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent