Shane Douglas Sichting v. Patricia V. Bradley
Petitioner: Shane Douglas Sichting
Respondent: Patricia V. Bradley
Case Number: 2:2020cv08142
Filed: September 3, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Dale S Fischer
Referring Judge: Jean P Rosenbluth
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28:2241
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 26, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 26, 2020 Filing 7 Petitioners Opposition to Motion to Dismiss #6 filed by Petitioner Shane Douglas Sichting. (es) Modified on 10/27/2020 (es).
October 9, 2020 Filing 6 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION to Dismiss Case filed by respondent Patricia V. Bradley. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Suzanne Scott, #2 Proposed Order, #3 Proof of Service) (Pinchas, David)
October 1, 2020 Filing 5 FINANCIAL ENTRY: Received $5.00 from Shane Douglas Sichting. Re: Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) #1 . Receipt number LA212142. (fr)
September 24, 2020 Filing 4 Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney David E Pinchas counsel for Respondent Patricia V. Bradley. Adding David Pinchas as counsel of record for Patricia V. Bradley for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Respondent Patricia V. Bradley. (Attorney David E Pinchas added to party Patricia V. Bradley(pty:res))(Pinchas, David)
September 10, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER REQUIRING ANSWER/RETURN TO PETITION by Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth. Within 14 days of the date of this Order, Respondent must file and serve a notice of appearance. Respondent should file a motion to dismiss within 30 days of the date of this Order. Notice: The court has issued a ruling on preliminary review. Pursuant to the Agreement on Acceptance of Service between the Clerk of Court and the United States Attorneys Office, this Notice constitutes service under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4. (Attachments: #1 Petition for writ of Habeas Corpus, #2 Blank Consent Form) (et)
September 3, 2020 Filing 2 NOTICE OF REFERENCE to a U.S. Magistrate Judge. This case has been assigned to the calendar of the Honorable District Judge Dale S. Fischer and referred to Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth, who is authorized to consider preliminary matters and conduct all further hearings as may be appropriate or necessary. Pursuant to Local Rule 83-2.4, the Court must be notified within five (5) days of any address change. See notice for additional details. (Attachments: #1 CV111) (jtil)
September 3, 2020 Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person In Federal Custody (28:2241), filed by Petitioner Shane Douglas Sichting. Case assigned to Judge Dale S. Fischer and referred to Magistrate Judge Jean P. Rosenbluth. (jtil)

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 California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Shane Douglas Sichting v. Patricia V. Bradley
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Patricia V. Bradley
Represented By: Assistant 2241-194 US Attorney LA-CV
Represented By: David E Pinchas
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: Shane Douglas Sichting
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?