Bailey v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Justia Dockets & Filings Sixth Circuit Ohio Southern District Bailey v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Bailey v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Petitioner:	Elmo Bailey
Respondent:	UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Case Number:	3:2014cv00453
Filed:	December 16, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office:	Dayton Office
County:	MONTGOMERY
Presiding Judge:	Michael R Merz
Presiding Judge:	Walter H Rice
Nature of Suit:	General
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1651
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
January 20, 2015	Filing 4 CLERK'S JUDGMENT with attached Notice of Disopsal. Signed on 01/20/15. (pb1)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
December 17, 2014	Filing 2 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - It is accordingly respectfully recommended that the Petition herein be dismissed without prejudice as barred by 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e). In the alternative, it is recommended that the Petition be dismissed without prejud ice for lack of personal jurisdiction over Bailey's custodian. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a certificate of appealability and the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 1/5/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 12/16/2014. (kpf1)(This document has been sent by the Clerks Office by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

Date Filed

Document Text

January 20, 2015

Filing 4 CLERK'S JUDGMENT with attached Notice of Disopsal. Signed on 01/20/15. (pb1)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

December 17, 2014

Filing 2 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - It is accordingly respectfully recommended that the Petition herein be dismissed without prejudice as barred by 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e). In the alternative, it is recommended that the Petition be dismissed without prejud ice for lack of personal jurisdiction over Bailey's custodian. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a certificate of appealability and the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 1/5/2015. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R Merz on 12/16/2014. (kpf1)(This document has been sent by the Clerks Office by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

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 Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Bailey 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
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: Elmo Bailey
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?