Ehab Allababidi v. Matt Junkin, et al
| EHAB ALLABABIDI |
| MATT JUNKIN and MARGARET K. FONTANA |
| 26-2162 |
| June 1, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit |
| Habeas Corpus |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 26, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 Mandate issued. No record to be returned. [9] [7535696] [26-2162, 26-2163] (CAH) [Entered: 06/26/2026 09:16 AM] |
| FOR COURT USE ONLY: Certified copy of 06/04/2026 Final Order with Mandate sent to the District Court Clerk. [7535697-2] [7535697] [26-2162, 26-2163] (CAH) [Entered: 06/26/2026 09:19 AM] |
Filing 8
ORDER: The motion to consolidate appeal nos. 26-2162 and 26-2163 is GRANTED to the extent that the appeals are consolidated for purposes of disposition. Further, the motion for an injunction pending appeal is DENIED and these appeals are DISMISSED. Appeal no. 26-2162 is premature. Although 28 U.S.C. 1292(a)(1) permits appeal from interlocutory orders refusing injunctions, here the district court denied appellants motion for a preliminary injunction on May 29, 2026. Under Rule 4(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, a notice of appeal filed after the court announces a decision or orderbut before the entry of the judgment or orderis treated as filed on the date of and after the entry. See FirsTier Mortg. Co. v. Invs. Mortg. Ins. Co. , 498 U.S. 269, 276 (1991). The district court had not yet announced its decision on the motion for a preliminary injunction when this notice of appeal was filed on May 27, 2026. Further, appeal no. 26-2163 is frivolous. Summary disposition is appropriate where any arguments an appellant could raise are incomprehensible or completely insubstantial. United States v. Fortner , 455 F.3d 752, 754 (7th Cir. 2006). The district court did not abuse its broad discretion in denying any request for injunctive relief from arrest and refusing to interfere with ongoing state-court proceedings. See Younger v. Harris , 401 U.S. 37, 4546 (1971). And the denial of a stay of litigation is not generally appealable prior to entry of final judgment. See Sherwood v. Marquette Transp. Co., LLC , 587 F.3d 841, 844 (7th Cir. 2009). (See order for further details) Diane S. Sykes, Circuit Judge; Thomas L. Kirsch II, Circuit Judge and Candace Jackson-Akiwumi, Circuit Judge. [8] [7530653] [26-2162, 26-2163] (PS) [Entered: 06/04/2026 03:25 PM]
|
| Filing 7 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Mr. Ehab Allababidi in 26-2162 & 26-2163 to consolidate appeals. [7] [7529931] [26-2162, 26-2163] (JR) [Entered: 06/02/2026 01:57 PM] |
| Filing 6 Filed Seventh Circuit Transcript Information Sheet by Appellant Mr. Ehab Allababidi. [6] [7529705] [26-2162] (VG) [Entered: 06/01/2026 04:54 PM] |
| Filing 5 Docketing Statement filed by Appellant Mr. Ehab Allababidi. Prior or Related proceedings: No. [5] [7529704] [26-2162] (VG) [Entered: 06/01/2026 04:54 PM] |
| Filing 4 This is notification that no appellee(s) or counsel for the appellee(s) were served in the District Court. [4] [7529663] [26-2162] (HTP) [Entered: 06/01/2026 03:13 PM] |
| Filing 3 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Mr. Ehab Allababidi for perfected jurisdiction and executed warrant. [3] [7529662] [26-2162] (HTP) [Entered: 06/01/2026 03:12 PM] |
| Filing 2 Pro se motion filed by Appellant Mr. Ehab Allababidi for injunction pending appeal. [2] [7529660] [26-2162] (HTP) [Entered: 06/01/2026 03:11 PM] |
| Filing 1 State prisoner's habeas corpus case docketed. Certificate of Appealability pending. IFP. Docketing Statement due for Appellant Ehab Allababidi by 06/03/2026. Transcript information sheet due by 06/15/2026. [1] [7529655] [26-2162] (HTP) [Entered: 06/01/2026 03:04 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
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.
