General v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
| Ramel General |
| FCI Berlin and Federal Bureau of Prisons |
| 1:2024fp00248 |
| August 12, 2024 |
| US District Court for the District of New Hampshire |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 20, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| NOTICE - Filing Fee Omitted. Either the $5.00 filing fee or an application to proceed without fees or costs must be submitted within 60 days. If proceeding without prepayment of fees or costs is sought the court needs: Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees or Costs, Certificate of Custodial Institution. Compliance Deadline set for 10/21/2024.(ed) |
| NOTICE. This case has been designated for Electronic Case Filing. All further submissions shall be filed in compliance with the Administrative Procedures for Electronic Case Filing. Pro se litigants are not required to file electronically and may continue to file documents in paper format. Persons filing electronically are strongly encouraged to complete the interactive training modules available on the courts website. To access these modules, click #HERE. (ed) |
| Filing 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 USC 2241. filed by Ramel General. (Attachments: #1 Attachments)(ed) |
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 New Hampshire 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.
