Alcalde Cueto v. Barr et al
Miguel Alcalde Cueto |
Chad Wolf, Robert Guardian, Damon Acoff, Randy Kern and William P. Barr |
3:2020cv00669 |
July 9, 2020 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois |
Nancy J Rosenstengel |
Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on July 24, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 4 Mail Returned as Undeliverable. Documents 2 and 3 sent to Miguel Alcalde Cueto (ack) |
Filing 3 ORDER CLOSING CASE: Petitioner Miguel Alcalde Cueto submitted his Habeas Corpus Petition and $5.00 filing fee payment which were received and docketed in this case on July 9, 2020. The Petition is identical to the unsigned document (Doc. 1) in Case No. 20-cv-643-SMY, opened June 30, 2020. The Court struck that Petition and directed Petitioner to refile it with his signature, but as he did not include the case number, it was filed as a new action. Because the instant case is a duplicate, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to administratively close this case, refund the $5.00 filing fee to Petitioner, and file the Petition (Doc. #1 ) in Case No. 20-cv-643-SMY. Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 7/9/2020. (beb)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED. |
Filing 2 The Court has received your Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and filing fee. Your case number is 20-669-NJR. The following is important information concerning the initial stages of your lawsuit. The Court will review your petition to determine whether it survives preliminary review under Rule 4 and Rule 1(b) of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases in United States District Courts. The Court will conduct this review within the next 60 days and inform you of the findings in an Order. No other action will be taken in your case during this time, absent extraordinary circumstances. Therefore, you do not need to submit any evidence, argument, motions, or other documents. If you do not receive a preliminary review Order within the next 60 days, you may file a motion requesting the status of your case. If you filed a motion for recruitment of counsel, it will not be considered until the Court has completed the preliminary review of your petition. Please note that any motion for recruitment of counsel must include evidence of your own efforts to find counsel such as a list of the attorneys you contacted and copies of letters you sent or received. See Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 654-55 (7th Cir. 2007). In the event your petition survives the preliminary review, the Court will instruct the respondent to file a response to the petition and you will be notified of your deadline to file a reply. In addition, several administrative matters warrant mention. Any communication directed to the Court should be in the form of a motion or other pleading and not a letter. All mail should be sent to: Clerk's Office, U.S. District Court, 750 Missouri Avenue, East St. Louis, IL 62201. Finally, you are advised that if your address changes, you must notify the Court within seven days of the change by filing a Notice of Change of Address. Failure to do so could result in the dismissal of your case. Signed by Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel on 7/9/2020. (jaj)THIS TEXT ENTRY IS AN ORDER OF THE COURT. NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION WILL BE MAILED. |
Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Miguel Alcalde Cueto.(jaj) |
Filing fee paid. $5.00, receipt number 34625102661. (jaj) |
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 Southern 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
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.