Bostic v. Warden, FCI Pekin
| Dana Bostic |
| Warden, FCI Pekin |
| 1:2020cv01391 |
| November 9, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Central District of Illinois |
| James E Shadid |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 16, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings as to #1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Responses due by 1/22/2021, Replies due by 2/12/2021. (JS, ilcd) |
TEXT ORDER Entered by Judge James E. Shadid on 12/15/2020. Respondents Motion for Extension of Time #5 is GRANTED for good cause described in the motion. Respondents response to Petitioners Petition is now due on or before January 22, 2021. Petitioner may file a reply on or before February 12, 2021. (AEM, ilcd)
|
| Filing 5 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #2 Order by Respondent Warden, FCI Pekin. Responses due by 12/28/2020 (Simpson, W.) |
| Filing 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE Executed as to Clerk's Certificate of Mailing Acknowledgement filed by W. Scott Simpson. (AEM, ilcd) Modified on 12/3/2020 (AEM, ilcd). |
| Filing 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE Executed as to Clerk's Certificate of Mailing Acknowledgement filed by Warden, FCI Pekin. (AEM, ilcd) |
| Set/Reset Deadlines/Hearings: Responses due by 12/14/2020 (AEM, ilcd) Modified on 11/25/2020 (AEM, ilcd). |
|
Filing 2
ORDER Entered by Judge James E. Shadid on 11/23/2020. Respondent to file an answer, motion, or other response, within twenty-one (21) days after service of this Order. (See Full Order)(AEM, ilcd)
|
| Filing fee: $ 5.00, receipt number 14626039071 (SAG, ilcd) |
|
TEXT ORDER Entered by Judge James E. Shadid on 11/17/2020. Petitioner has filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241 but has not paid the $5 filing fee. Petitioner is DIRECTED to either pay the $5 filing fee or provide the Court with a signed Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs that also includes a copy of his trust fund ledger, certified by the appropriate institutional officer, showing all receipts, expenditures and balances for the last six months. Petitioner shall do so on or before December 18, 2020, or the Court will dismiss the case without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee. The Clerk is DIRECTED to send Petitioner a copy of the forms for proceeding in forma pauperis.(AEM, ilcd)
|
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Dana Bostic.(AEM, ilcd) |
Access additional case information on PACER
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 Illinois Central 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: Bostic v. Warden, FCI Pekin | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: Warden, FCI Pekin | |
| Represented By: | W. Scott Simpson |
| 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: Dana Bostic | |
| 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.
