Taboada v. United States of America
Petitioner: Ricardo Taboada
Respondent: United States of America
Case Number: 1:2022cv08141
Filed: September 22, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Presiding Judge: Lewis J Liman
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on June 23, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 25, 2022 Opinion or Order Received e-mail from the United States District Court - District of New Jersey acknowledging receipt of transferred case. Assigned Case Number: 1:22-cv-06243, filed on 10/24/2022. (sac)
October 25, 2022 Opinion or Order MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 5. Mailed to: Ricardo Taboada 11714-052 FCI Fort Dix Box 2000 Joint Base MDL, NJ 08640. (dsh)
October 24, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 5 ORDER: The Court finds that this petition for a writ of audita querela, notwithstanding its designation, should be construed, in part, as a motion under 28 U.S.C. 2255, and, in part, as a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 2241. If Petitioner does not want to pursue relief under Section 2255, he must notify the Court in writing within 60 days that he wishes to withdraw his Section 2255 motion. If he does not inform the Court of his intent within 60 days, the Court will construe that portion of his petition that challenges the imposition of his sentence as a Section 2255 motion. No response to that portion of the petition is required as this time. The Court directs the Clerk of Court to sever, under Rule 21 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that portion of the petition that the Court construes as asserting claims for Section 2241 relief in which Petitioner challenges the execution of his sentence, and to transfer, under 28 U.S.C. 1406(a), those claims to the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey as a separate Section 2241 petition. Whether Petitioner should be permitted to proceed further with respect to his Section 2241 petition without payment of fees, and whether he should be provided with notice and an opportunity to withdraw his Section 2241 petition, are determinations to be made by the transferee court. As Petitioner has not, at this time, made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. 2253. 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 in forma pauperis 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 Lewis J. Liman on 10/24/2022) (tg)
October 24, 2022 Opinion or Order PARTY TRANSFERRED OUT ELECTRONICALLY pertaining to Richardo Taboada's portion of the petition that the Court construes as asserting claims for Section 2241 relief in which Petitioner challenges the execution of his sentence only, from the U.S.D.C. Southern District of New York to the United States District Court - District of New Jersey.(tg)
October 14, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORIGINAL SIGNATURE PAGE, re: Motion to Vacate. Document filed by Ricardo Taboada. (sc)
September 30, 2022 Opinion or Order MAILING RECEIPT: Document No: 2. Mailed to: Ricardo Taboada 11714-052 FCI Fort Dix Box 2000 Joint Base MDL, NJ 08640. (dsh)
September 29, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER DIRECTING ORIGINAL SIGNATURE: Plaintiff is directed to submit a signed signature page to this Court's Pro Se Office within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. 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 in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). Signature Page due by 10/31/2022. (Signed by Judge Lewis J. Liman on 9/29/2022) (aan)
September 22, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 1 MOTION to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence (28 U.S.C. 2255). NO FURTHER ENTRIES. PLEASE SEE CRIMINAL CASE: 19-Cr-117.Document filed by Ricardo Taboada..(rdz)
September 22, 2022 Opinion or Order Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (rdz)
September 22, 2022 Opinion or Order CASE ACCEPTED AS RELATED. Create association to 1:19-cr-00117-LJL. (rdz)
September 22, 2022 Opinion or Order Case Designated ECF. (rdz)

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: Taboada v. United States of America
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Ricardo Taboada
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: United States of America
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?