CASTANON v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Justia Dockets & Filings Third Circuit New Jersey District Court CASTANON v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

CASTANON v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Petitioner:	ROBERTO CASTANON
Respondent:	UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Case Number:	2:2011cv07634
Filed:	December 23, 2011
Court:	US District Court for the District of New Jersey
Office:	Newark Office
County:	Essex
Presiding Judge:	William H. Walls
Nature of Suit:	Prisoner: Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
November 6, 2013	Filing 8 MEMORANDUM OPINION/ORDER that the Clerk shall reopen this matter for the purposes of this Courts examination of Petitioners application for Leave to Appeal out-of-time docketed as Docket Entry No. 5, by making a new and separate entry on the docket r eading, CIVIL CASE REOPENED; that Petitioners application docketed as Docket Entry No. 5 is denied; that the Clerk shall administratively terminate this matter by making a new and separate entry on the docket reading, CIVIL CASE TERMINATED; that the Clerk shall serve this Memorandum Opinion and Order upon Respondent by means of electronic delivery; that the Clerk shall serve this Memorandum Opinion and Order upon Petitioner by certified mail, return receipt requested, and enclose in said mailin g: (a) copies of this Courts substantive disposition opinion and order docketed in this matter as Docket Entries Nos. 2 and 3; and (b) a copy of Respondents opposition docketed in this matter as Docket Entry No. 7. Signed by Judge William H. Walls on 11/6/13. (DD, )

Date Filed

Document Text

November 6, 2013

Filing 8 MEMORANDUM OPINION/ORDER that the Clerk shall reopen this matter for the purposes of this Courts examination of Petitioners application for Leave to Appeal out-of-time docketed as Docket Entry No. 5, by making a new and separate entry on the docket r eading, CIVIL CASE REOPENED; that Petitioners application docketed as Docket Entry No. 5 is denied; that the Clerk shall administratively terminate this matter by making a new and separate entry on the docket reading, CIVIL CASE TERMINATED; that the Clerk shall serve this Memorandum Opinion and Order upon Respondent by means of electronic delivery; that the Clerk shall serve this Memorandum Opinion and Order upon Petitioner by certified mail, return receipt requested, and enclose in said mailin g: (a) copies of this Courts substantive disposition opinion and order docketed in this matter as Docket Entries Nos. 2 and 3; and (b) a copy of Respondents opposition docketed in this matter as Docket Entry No. 7. Signed by Judge William H. Walls on 11/6/13. (DD, )

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New Jersey District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: CASTANON v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Represented By:	THOMAS J. EICHER
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: ROBERTO CASTANON
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

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?