Robert Davis v. Ron Neal
Defendant / Appellee: RON NEAL
Petitioner / Appellant: ROBERT E. DAVIS
Case Number: 21-2142
Filed: June 21, 2021
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on August 17, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 17, 2021 Filing 8 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Robert E. Davis for certificate of appealability. [8] [7179610] [21-2142] (CAH) [Entered: 08/17/2021 11:36 AM]
July 28, 2021 Filing 7 Filed notice from the District Court that the appeal docketing fee was received. [7] [7175775] [21-2142] (CM) [Entered: 07/28/2021 02:04 PM]
July 19, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 6 ORDER re: Motion to obtain a blank certificate of appealability form. IT IS ORDERED that the motion is DENIED. This court does not have a certificate of appealability form. The petitioner should make his best effort to explain why the district courts assessment of his constitutional claim or claims was debatable or wrong. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). To the extent that the petitioner is requesting an extension of time, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the request is GRANTED to the extent that any separate request for a certificate of appealability is due by August 17, 2021. In the event that the appellant does not file a motion by that date, his notice of appeal previously docketed in this court will be deemed to constitute an application for a certificate of appealability. See Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(2). SCR [6] [7173531] [21-2142] (AG) [Entered: 07/19/2021 08:55 AM]
July 13, 2021 Filing 5 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Robert E. Davis to obtain a blank certificate of appealability form. [5] [7172543] [21-2142] (CAH) [Entered: 07/13/2021 12:41 PM]
July 12, 2021 Filing 4 Recieved copy of pro se IFP motion filed by Appellant Robert E. Davis on 7/9/2021. [4] [7172312] [21-2142] (MAN) [Entered: 07/12/2021 03:29 PM]
July 9, 2021 Filing 3 Prose motion filed by Appellant Robert E. Davis to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. [3] [7172103] [21-2142] (CM) [Entered: 07/09/2021 04:12 PM]
June 29, 2021 Filing 2 Filed District Court order DENYING leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis and DENYING motion for Certificate of Appealability. Date IFP denied: 06/28/2021. Issued Circuit Rule 3(b) 30 day notice for failure to pay the docketing fee. Fee or IFP forms due on 07/29/2021 for Appellant Robert E. Davis [7169774] [2] [7169774] [21-2142] (CG) [Entered: 06/29/2021 09:38 AM]
June 21, 2021 Filing 1 State prisoner's habeas corpus case docketed. Certificate of Appealability denied 05/20/2021. IFP pending in the District Court. Docketing statement filed. Transcript information sheet due by 07/06/2021. [1] [7168504] [21-2142] (FP) [Entered: 06/23/2021 12:53 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: Robert Davis v. Ron Neal
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant / appellee: RON NEAL
Represented By: Caryn Nieman Szyper
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 / appellant: ROBERT E. DAVIS
Represented By: Robert E. Davis
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?