Legal Opinion

(PS) Nible v. Macomber

District Court, E.D. California

Decided August 21, 2024No. 2:24-cv-01259Unknown

1Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILLIAM LYLE NIBLE, Case No. 2:24-cv-1259-DJC-CSK 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO SERVE AND DENYING MOTION 14 JEFF MACOMBER, et al., TO SUPPLEMENT WITHOUT PREJUDICE 15 Defendants. (ECF Nos. 13, 14) 16 17 On May 1, 2024, Plaintiff William Lyle Nible, who is proceeding pro se, filed a 18 complaint that named Jeff Macomber and Tommee Dorsey as defendants. (ECF No. 1). 19 On July 1, 2024, Plaintiff filed his first amended complaint, naming as defendants 20 Macomber, Dorsey, and nine…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Cafasso v. General Dynamics C4 Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
  2. Bolden v. City of TopekaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2006
  3. Simpkins v. WindsorOregon Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Carr v. International Game TechnologyDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API