UI-HASSAN v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
| MAHMOUD UI-HASSAN and MAHMOOD UI-HASSAN |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| 2:2022cv00543 |
| November 29, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Mario Garcia |
| James R Sweeney |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 22, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 FINAL JUDGMENT - The Court now enters FINAL JUDGMENT. The action is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Copy sent to Petitioner via US Mail. Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 12/22/2022.(JRB) |
Filing 9
Order Dismissing Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence for Lack of Jurisdiction and Denying a Certificate of Appealability - For the Petitioner's reference, a copy of Circuit Rule 22.2 governing Successive Petitions for Collateral Review is attached to this Order. For those reasons, this action is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. If Petitioner wants to pursue a claim for relief based on Wooden, he must first obtain the Seventh Circuit's permission. Judgment consistent with this Order shall now issue and a copy of this Order shall be docketed in United States v. Ul-Hassan, 2:90-cr-00006-JPH-CMM-3. The Court denies a certificate of appealability. SEE ORDER. Copy sent to Petitioner via US Mail. Signed by Judge James R. Sweeney II on 12/22/2022. (Attachments: #1 Circuit Rule 22-2)(JRB)
|
| Filing 8 CONSENT to Jurisdiction to US Magistrate Judge by MAHMOOD UI-HASSAN. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(JRB) |
| Filing 7 MAGISTRATE JUDGE's NOTICE of Availability to Exercise Jurisdiction issued. (KAA) |
| Filing 6 Case transferred in from District of Connecticut; Case Number 3:22-cv-01231. Original file copy of transfer order and docket sheet received. |
|
Filing 5
ORDER. For the reasons in the attached order, and in accordance with the requirements of 28 U.S.C. 2244, the petition is TRANSFERRED to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1631, to take whatever action it deems appropriate. Upon transfer, the Clerk is directed to close this case. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 11/15/2022. (Kuegler, Adam) [Transferred from Connecticut on 11/29/2022.]
|
| Filing fee received from Mahmood Ul-Hassan: $ 5.00, receipt number HFD 19541. (Peterson, M) [Transferred from Connecticut on 11/29/2022.] |
|
Filing 4
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 10/3/2022.(Mendez, D) [Transferred from Connecticut on 11/29/2022.]
|
|
Filing 3
STANDING PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 10/3/2022.(Mendez, D) [Transferred from Connecticut on 11/29/2022.]
|
|
Filing 2
ORDER: We received your Writ of Habeas Corpus which has been assigned case number 3:22cv1231. In order to proceed, the filing fee or a Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis must be submitted to the Court by 11/2/2022 or the case will be subject to dismissal. Fee information and the Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis form may be found on the Court's website at ctd.uscourts.gov. Dismissal due by 11/2/2022. Signed by Clerk on 10/3/2022.(Mendez, D) [Transferred from Connecticut on 11/29/2022.]
|
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Mahmoud Ui-Hassan. (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(Mendez, D) [Transferred from Connecticut on 11/29/2022.] |
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 Indiana 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.
