Fairly Earls v. BOP
| FAIRLY W. EARLS |
| FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS |
| 22-2023 |
| June 9, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
| Habeas Corpus |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 4, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
ORDER re: Motion by Fairly W. Earls objecting and for an order to reinstate appellee in the docket in this appeal. Review of the district court docket shows that the Federal Bureau of Prisons did not participate in the district court, and it has informed this court that it will not be participating in this appeal. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED, and this appeal will be submitted for decision without participation by the appellee. [ # 11 ] JPK [12] [7252422] [22-2023] (HTP) [Entered: 08/04/2022 10:59 AM]
|
| Filing 11 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Fairly W. Earls objecting and for an order to reinstate appellee in the docket in the appeal. [11] [7251715] [22-2023] (LCP) [Entered: 08/01/2022 03:39 PM] |
|
Filing 10
Order re: Motion of the United States Attorney for an order of non-involvement on appeal due to a lack of service in the trial court. Appellee Federal Bureau of Prisons has notified the court that the it was not served with process in the district court and will not be proceeding in this appeal. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the clerk remove the appellee from the docket in this appeal. This appeal will be submitted for decision without participation by the appellee. [ # 9 ] CMD [10] [7249208] [22-2023] (ER) [Entered: 07/19/2022 02:39 PM]
|
| Filing 9 Motion filed by Appellee BOP For an Order of Non-Involvement on Appeal Due to a Lack of Service in the Trial Court. [9] [7248839] [22-2023] (Herje, Leslie) [Entered: 07/18/2022 02:23 PM] |
| Filing 8 10 copies Appellant's brief filed by Appellant Fairly W. Earls. Disk not required. REMINDER: Hearing notices are mailed shortly before the date of oral argument. Please note that counsel's unavailability for oral argument must be submitted by letter, filed electronically with the Clerk's Office, no later than the filing of the appellant's brief in a criminal case and the filing of an appellee's brief in a civil case. See Cir. R. 34(b)(3). The court's calendar is located at http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/cal/argcalendar.pdf. Once scheduled, oral argument is rescheduled only in extraordinary circumstances. See Cir. R. 34(b)(4), (e). [8] [7248294] [22-2023] (LJ) [Entered: 07/14/2022 02:51 PM] |
|
Filing 7
ORDER re: Motion for waiver on number of copies. [ # 6 ] The motion is GRANTED to the extent that the appellant may submit one copy of papers filed with the court. The appellant is reminded of his obligation to serve opposing counsel with a copy of all court filings. CMD [7] [7248053] [22-2023] (PS) [Entered: 07/13/2022 02:30 PM]
|
| Filing 6 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Fairly W. Earls to waive the number of copies required. [6] [7247385] [22-2023] (CAG) [Entered: 07/11/2022 02:58 PM] |
|
Filing 5
ORDER: On June 24, 2022, the District Court granted the petitioners motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. Accordingly, briefing in this appeal will now proceed as follows: Appellant's brief due on or before 07/25/2022 for Fairly W. Earls. Appellee's brief due on or before 08/24/2022 for Federal Bureau of Prisons. Appellant's reply brief, if any, is due on or before 09/14/2022 for Appellant Fairly W. Earls. [7245676] [22-2023] (PS) [Entered: 07/01/2022 11:48 AM]
|
| Filing 4 Filed District Court order GRANTING Appellant Fairly W. Earls leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. Date IFP granted: 06/24/2022. Earls has also filed a motion for certificate of appealability. (Dkt. #[14].) However, because Earls was proceeding under 28 U.S.C. 2241, challenging a decision of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, he does not need a certificate of appealability to appeal this court's decision. See 28 U.S.C. 2253 (c)(1). Therefore, the motion is DENIED as unnecessary. [4] [7244583] [22-2023] (AP) [Entered: 06/27/2022 09:17 AM] |
| Filing 3 Notification from the District Court that a motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis is pending. [3] [7244271] [22-2023] (AD) [Entered: 06/23/2022 04:23 PM] |
| Filing 2 Docketing Statement filed by Appellant Fairly W. Earls. Prior or Related proceedings: Yes. 18-2427, 19-2034 [2] [7243311] [22-2023] (AP) [Entered: 06/17/2022 03:51 PM] |
| Filing 1 State prisoner's federal habeas corpus case docketed. Fee due. Transcript information sheet due by 06/23/2022. Docketing Statement due for Appellant Fairly W. Earls by 06/16/2022. Fee or IFP forms due on 06/23/2022 for Appellant Fairly W. Earls. [1] [7241839] [22-2023] (FP) [Entered: 06/10/2022 03:19 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: Fairly Earls v. BOP | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner / appellant: FAIRLY W. EARLS | |
| Represented By: | Fairly W. Earls |
| 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: FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS | |
| Represented By: | Leslie K. Herje |
| 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.
