No. 22-7591
IFP
Tags: 28-usc-1361 28-usc-1915 civil-procedure court-of-appeals district-court due-process federal-rules-of-civil-procedure mandamus service-of-process standing statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
DueProcess
DueProcess
Latest Conference:
2023-09-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Arkansas Judge violate Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 4(c)(3), and 28 U.S.C. §1915(d)?
Question Presented (from Petition)
QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1. Didthe US. District Court of the Eastern District of Arkansas Judge violate Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 4(c)(3), and 28 U.S.C. §1915(d)? 2. Did the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit violate 28 U.S.C. §1361, action to compel an officer of the U.S. to perform his duty?
Docket Entries
2023-10-02
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. 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).
2023-07-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-05-09
Petition for a writ of mandamus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due June 20, 2023)