Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

15-1281 - Cassise #285716 v. Ryan et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
15-1281 - Cassise #285716 v. Ryan et al
January 26, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER granting the Motion for Clarification. (Doc. 14). FURTHER ORDERED denying the request to stay the proceedings. FURTHER ORDERED denying the Motion for Summary Disposition. (Doc. 16). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Respondents must answer the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Doc. 1) by February 26, 2016. To the extent that Respondents may request leave to file a dispositive motion in place of an answer, the request is granted. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eileen S Willett on 1/26/2016.(KMG)
June 8, 2016
PDF | More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, recommending that the Court grant Respondents' 19 "Motion to Dismiss Habeas Petition for Containing Only Unexhausted Claims," and that the 1 Petition be dismissed without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that a certificate of appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal be denied because dismissal of the Petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and the undersigned finds that jurists of reason would not find it debatable whether the Court was correct in its procedural ruling. Signed by Magistrate Judge Eileen S Willett on 6/8/2016. (ATD)
June 28, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER ACCEPTING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 19 in its entirety - IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the respondents' Motion to Dismiss Habeas Petition for Containing Only Unexhausted Claims (Doc. 19) is granted and that the petitioner's Petition Under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 for a Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in State Custody is denied and that this action is dismissed without prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no certificate of appealability shall issue and that leave to appeal in forma pauperis is denied because the dismissal of the petitioner's habeas petition is justified by a plain procedural bar and jurists of reason would not find the Court's procedural ruling debatable. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly. (See document for full details). Signed by Senior Judge Paul G Rosenblatt on 6/28/16. (LAD)
November 8, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER denying 46 and 49 petitioner's Motions to Reconsider Dismissal of Habeas Petition; denying 47 petitioner's Motion for Leave to Supplement the Record and denying 48 Motion for Production of Records and Docket. No certificate of appealability shall issue because the petitioner has not shown that jurists of reason would find it debatable either that the Court abused its discretion in denying the motions for reconsideration or that the underlying § 2254 petition states a valid claim for the denial of a constitutional right. Signed by Senior Judge Paul G Rosenblatt on 11/7/16.(LSP)