Fawzi v. Warden
Petitioner: Nabil Fawzi
Respondent: Warden
Case Number: 1:2018cv03158
Filed: April 10, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: Clinton
Presiding Judge: Barbara C. Moses
Presiding Judge: Gregory H. Woods
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
August 30, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 32 ORDER: Respondent is directed to file a response to Petitioner's objections to the Report and Recommendation, Dkt. No. 31 (the "R&R"), no later than September 19, 2024. In accordance with the Court's Individual Rules of Practic e in Civil Cases, no reply will be considered by the Court unless it is authorized by the Court in advance. Therefore, the Court will consider the petition to be fully briefed following the submission of Respondent's response to Petitioner's objections to the R&R. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Petitioner by certified mail. SO ORDERED. ( Objections to R&R due by 9/19/2024) (Signed by Judge Gregory H. Woods on 8/30/2024) (tg)
April 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER: To conserve resources, to promote judicial efficiency, and in an effort to achieve a faster disposition of this matter, it is hereby ORDERED that the parties must discuss whether they are willing to consent, under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), to conducting all further proceedings before the assigned Magistrate Judge. If both parties consent to proceed before the Magistrate Judge, counsel for the defendant must, within two weeks of the date of this order file on ECF a fully executed Noti ce, Consent, and Reference of a Civil Action to a Magistrate Judge form, a copy of which is attached to this order (and also available at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf). The executed form should be filed on ECF as a "Proposed Consent to Jurisdiction by US Magistrate Judge," and be described using the Proposed Consent to Jurisdiction by US Magistrate Judge filing event in accordance with ECF Rule 13.27. If the Court approves that form, all further proceedings will then be conducted before the assigned Magistrate Judge rather than before me. Any appeal would be taken directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, as it would be if the consent form were not signed and so ordered. If either party does not consent to conducting all further proceedings before the assigned Magistrate Judge, the parties must file a joint letter, within two weeks of the date of this order advising the Court that the parties do not consent, but without disclosing the identity of the party or parties who do not consent. The parties are free to withhold consent without negative consequences. (Signed by Judge Gregory H. Woods on 4/28/2022) (tro)
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Fawzi v. Warden
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Nabil Fawzi
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: Warden
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?