Williams v. Carey
| 5:2005cv03891 |
| September 27, 2005 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Jose Office |
| Ronald M. Whyte |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
53
ORDER Denying Petitioner's Request for Reconsideration and Rehearing. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 6/3/11. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/3/2011)
|
|
Filing
48
ORDER by Judge Ronald M. Whyte Denying 46 Motion for Leave to Appeal in Forma Pauperis. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 11/30/2010)
|
|
Filing
45
ORDER Granting Motion for Extension of Time to File a Notice of Appeal. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 3/23/10. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/24/2010)
|
|
Filing
40
JUDGMENT, ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Ronald M. Whyte on 1/5/10. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/5/2010)
|
|
Filing
34
ORDER by Judge Ronald M. Whyte Granting 33 Motion for Extension of Time to File Traverse. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/30/2009)
|
|
Filing
25
ORDER by Judge Ronald M. Whyte Denying 24 Motion for Reconsideration; Further Scheduling Order. (jg, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 10/27/2008)
|
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Williams v. Carey | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
