Toolasprashad v. Schult

Toolasprashad v. Schult

Petitioner:	Latchmie Narayan Toolasprashad
Respondent:	Deborah G. Schult
Case Number:	9:2010cv01050
Filed:	August 31, 2010
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of New York
Office:	Prisoner Office
County:	Essex
Presiding Judge:	Lawrence E. Kahn
Presiding Judge:	David R. Homer
Nature of Suit:	General
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2241
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
July 26, 2011	Filing 51 DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED, that Toolasprashad's Petition (Dkt. No. 1 ) is DISMISSED without prejudice with respect to his claim seeking review of his detention by the Bureau of Immigration & Customs Enforcement. ORDERED, that the Report-Recom mendation (Dkt. No. 32 ) is APPROVED and ADOPTED with respect to all other findings therein. ORDERED, that Respondent's Motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 20 ) is GRANTED with respect to Petitioner's claims seeking review of his petition for na turalization and his removal proceedings. ORDERED, that Petitioner is given leave to file an amended petition in accordance with the above within thirty (30) days of the filing date of this Order. ORDERED, that if Petitioner does not file an amende d petition within thirty (30) days of the filing date of this Order, this action shall be dismissed without prejudice without further order of this Court. ORDERED, that Petitioner's Motion for a bail hearing (Dkt. No. 31 ) is DENIED. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 7/26/11. (Decision and Order served on petitioner by regular mail) (alh, )

Date Filed

Document Text

July 26, 2011

Filing 51 DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED, that Toolasprashad's Petition (Dkt. No. 1 ) is DISMISSED without prejudice with respect to his claim seeking review of his detention by the Bureau of Immigration & Customs Enforcement. ORDERED, that the Report-Recom mendation (Dkt. No. 32 ) is APPROVED and ADOPTED with respect to all other findings therein. ORDERED, that Respondent's Motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 20 ) is GRANTED with respect to Petitioner's claims seeking review of his petition for na turalization and his removal proceedings. ORDERED, that Petitioner is given leave to file an amended petition in accordance with the above within thirty (30) days of the filing date of this Order. ORDERED, that if Petitioner does not file an amende d petition within thirty (30) days of the filing date of this Order, this action shall be dismissed without prejudice without further order of this Court. ORDERED, that Petitioner's Motion for a bail hearing (Dkt. No. 31 ) is DENIED. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 7/26/11. (Decision and Order served on petitioner by regular mail) (alh, )

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 York Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Toolasprashad v. Schult
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Latchmie Narayan Toolasprashad
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 ]
Respondent: Deborah G. Schult
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.

Why Is My Information Online?