Soto v. Caputo
Dujuan Soto |
Joseph Caputo |
22-1182 |
May 31, 2022 |
U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit |
PRISONER PET-Habeas Corpus |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on July 19, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 21 NEW CASE MANAGER, Ralph Obas, ASSIGNED.[3349759] [22-1182] [Entered: 07/19/2022 08:43 AM] |
Filing 20 ORDER, [ # 15 ] appeal dismissed for Appellant Dujuan Soto failure to pay fee, EFFECTIVE.[3349757] [22-1182] [Entered: 07/19/2022 08:42 AM] |
Filing 16 ATTORNEY, Barbara D. Underwood, for Joseph Caputo, TERMINATED.[3343047] [22-1182] [Entered: 07/06/2022 05:03 PM] |
Filing 15 ORDER, dated 06/22/2022, dismissing appeal by 07/13/2022, unless Appellant Dujuan Soto, submits fee or moves to proceed in forma pauperis, copy to pro se appellant, FILED.[3336482] [22-1182] [Entered: 06/22/2022 02:21 PM] |
Filing 14 ORDER, dated 06/22/2022, dismissing appeal by 07/13/2022, unless Appellant Dujuan Soto, submits Form D-P, copy to pro se appellant, FILED.[3336480] [22-1182] [Entered: 06/22/2022 02:18 PM] |
Filing 13 ORDER, dated 06/22/2022, dismissing appeal by 07/13/2022, unless Appellant Dujuan Soto, submits an Acknowledgment and Notice of Appearance Form, copy to pro se appellant, FILED.[3336469] [22-1182] [Entered: 06/22/2022 02:11 PM] |
Filing 12 STRIKE ORDER, striking Appellant Dujuan Soto, Motion, to proceed in forma pauperis, [4], from the docket, copy to pro se appellant, FILED.[3336465] [22-1182] [Entered: 06/22/2022 02:08 PM] |
Filing 9 PAPERS, Letter from New York County District Attorney's Office informing the Court that they are not participating in the appeal, RECEIVED.[3334049] [22-1182] [Entered: 06/16/2022 04:32 PM] |
Filing 8 NOTICE, to Appellee Joseph Caputo, for failure to file an appearance, SENT.[3333056] [22-1182] [Entered: 06/15/2022 12:52 PM] |
Filing 7 INSTRUCTIONAL FORMS, to Pro Se litigant, SENT.[3323895] [22-1182] [Entered: 05/31/2022 04:23 PM] |
Filing 6 ELECTRONIC INDEX, in lieu of record, FILED.[3323893] [22-1182] [Entered: 05/31/2022 04:21 PM] |
Filing 5 DEFECTIVE DOCUMENT, Motion, to proceed in forma pauperis, [4], on behalf of Appellant Dujuan Soto, copy to pro se appellant, FILED.[3323889] [22-1182] [Entered: 05/31/2022 04:17 PM] |
Filing 4 MOTION, to proceed in forma pauperis, on behalf of Appellant Dujuan Soto, FILED. Service date 05/18/2022 by US mail.[3323887] [22-1182] [Entered: 05/31/2022 04:16 PM] |
Filing 3 DISTRICT COURT JUDGMENT, dated 04/18/2022, RECEIVED.[3323885] [22-1182] [Entered: 05/31/2022 04:15 PM] |
Filing 2 DISTRICT COURT ORDER OF DISMISSAL, dated 04/18/2022, RECEIVED.[3323884] [22-1182] [Entered: 05/31/2022 04:14 PM] |
Filing 1 NOTICE OF PRISONER APPEAL, with district court docket, on behalf of Appellant Dujuan Soto, FILED. [3323880] [22-1182] [Entered: 05/31/2022 04:12 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Search for this case: Soto v. Caputo | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner / appellant: Dujuan Soto | |
Represented By: | Dujuan Soto |
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 ] |
Respondent / appellee: Joseph Caputo | |
Represented By: | Barbara D. Underwood |
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.