Banks v. Braun et al
Petitioner: Frederick Banks
Respondent: Gina Hospel, Central Intelligence Agency, Big Machine Records and Scooter Braun
Case Number: 1:2019cv06591
Filed: July 8, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Colleen McMahon
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 fd
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on November 15, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 27, 2019 Transmission of Notice of Appeal and Certified Copy of Docket Sheet to US Court of Appeals re: #6 Notice of Appeal. (tp)
August 27, 2019 Appeal Record Sent to USCA (Electronic File). Certified Indexed record on Appeal Electronic Files for #6 Notice of Appeal filed by Frederick Banks were transmitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals. (tp)
August 26, 2019 Filing 6 NOTICE OF APPEAL from #4 Judgment - Sua Sponte (Petition), #3 Order of Dismissal. Document filed by Frederick Banks. Form D-P is due within 14 days to the Court of Appeals, Second Circuit. (Attachments: #1 Motion for IFP) (tp)
August 26, 2019 Appeal Fee Due: for #6 Notice of Appeal. Appeal fee due by 9/9/2019. (tp)
August 26, 2019 Appeal Remark as to #6 Notice of Appeal filed by Frederick Banks. IFP DENIED 07/23/2019. (tp)
August 23, 2019 Filing 5 MOTION to Vacate #3 Order of Dismissal. Document filed by Frederick Banks. (sac)
July 23, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 4 CIVIL JUDGMENT. IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the complaint is dismissed without prejudice under the Prison Litigation Reform Act's "three strikes" rule. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). Plaintiff continues to be barred from filing any civil action under the in forma pauperis (IFP) statute while a prisoner unless Plaintiff is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from the Court's judgment would not be taken in good faith. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court mail a copy of this judgment to Plaintiff and note service on the docket. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 7/23/2019) (rjm) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
July 23, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER OF DISMISSAL UNDER 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). The Clerk of Court is directed to assign this matter to my docket, mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff, and note service on the docket. The Court denies Plaintiff's request to proceed IFP, and the complaint is dismissed without prejudice under the PLRA's "three-strikes" rule. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). Plaintiff remains barred from filing any future action IFP while in custody, unless he is under imminent threat of serious physical injury. The Clerk of Court is directed to docket this as a "written opinion" within the meaning of Section 205(a)(5) of the E-Government Act of 2002. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Colleen McMahon on 7/23/2019) (rjm). Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing. Transmission to Office of the Clerk of Court for processing.
July 23, 2019 Mailed a copy of #4 Judgment - Sua Sponte (Petition), #3 Order of Dismissal, Notice of Appeal Forms, to Frederick Banks DOC & POD No. 120759 Allegheny Coutny Jail 950 Second Avenue 8E Pittsburgh, PA 15219. (vba)
July 23, 2019 NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT - SUA SPONTE to Judge Colleen McMahon. Judge Unassigned is no longer assigned to the case. (rjm)
July 8, 2019 Filing 2 PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2241. Document filed by Frederick Banks. (sac)
July 8, 2019 Filing 1 MOTION AND DECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS. Document filed by Frederick Banks. (sac)
July 8, 2019 Case Designated ECF. (sac)

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: Banks v. Braun et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Gina Hospel
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: Central Intelligence Agency
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: Big Machine Records
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: Scooter Braun
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 ]
Petitioner: Frederick Banks
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?