Tafoya v. Raemisch et al

Filing 18

MINUTE ORDER denying 17 "Motion for Recsal" by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 10/28/15.(dkals, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 15-cv-01411-LTB ANTHONY TAFOYA, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF COLORADO, RICK RAEMISCH, in his official capacity as Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Corrections, and in his individual capacity, ROGER WERHOLZ, in his official capacity as Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Corrections, and in his individual capacity, TONY CAROCHI, in his official capacity as Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Corrections, and in his individual capacity, TOM CLEMENTS, in his official capacity as Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Corrections, and in his individual capacity, ARISTEDES ZAVARIS, in his official capacity as Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Corrections, and in his individual capacity, JOE ORTIZ, in his official capacity as Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Corrections, and in his individual capacity, JOHN SUTHERS, in his official capacity as Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Corrections, and in his individual capacity, MARY CARLSON, in her official capacity as Time Computation Manager of Colorado Department of Corrections, and in her individual capacity, and JOHN DOE, in his/her official capacity as Executive Director of the Colorado Department of Corrections, and in his individual capacity, Defendants. MINUTE ORDER ORDER ENTERED BY SENIOR JUDGE LEWIS T. BABCOCK This matter is before the Court on the “Motion for Recsal” [sic] (ECF No. 17) that Plaintiff, Anthony Tafoya, submitted pro se on October 26, 2015. This case was dismissed on September 18, 2015 (ECF No. 10), and the judgment (ECF No. 11) was entered on the same day. Therefore, the motion is DENIED as moot. Dated: October 28, 2015

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?