Antoine v. Warden
| 7:2020cv05130 |
| December 18, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| White Plains Office |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
25
CLERK'S JUDGMENT re: 24 Order Adopting Report and Recommendations, in favor of Warden against Amanze Antoine. It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Order dated September 7, 2021, The Co urt adopts the R&R in its entirety as the opinion of the Court. The motion to dismiss is GRANTED. The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED; accordingly, this case is closed. As petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Love v. McCray, 413 F.3d 192, 195 (2d Cir. 2005). 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, 44445 (1962). (Signed by Clerk of Court Ruby Krajick on 9/7/2021) (Attachments: # 1 Notice of Right to Appeal) (dt)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER: Accordingly, given petitioner's pro se status, the Court sua sponte extends to August 23, 2021, petitioner's time to file objections to Magistrate Judge Krause's R&R. Respondent's deadline to file responses to the objecti ons, if any, is September 6, 2021. If petitioner fails to file objections to the R&R by August 23, 2021, he will not be granted another opportunity to object to the R&R, and the Court will decide in due course whether to adopt the R&R. Chambers will mail a copy of this Order to petitioner at the address on the docket. (Objections to R&R due by 8/23/2021, Responses due by 9/6/2021) (Signed by Judge Vincent L. Briccetti on 7/30/2021) Copies Mailed By Chambers. (ate)
|
|
Filing
14
ORDER: On November 2, 2020, the Court issued an order that granted Respondent until December 11, 2020, to serve and file opposition papersthe Respondent's second extension of its opposition deadlinewith Petitioner to serve and file his reply within 30 days of his receipt of those papers. ECF No. 13. To date, Respondent has neither served and filed opposition papers nor contacted the Court to seek a further extension of time. Accordingly, the Court sua sponte grants Respondent one final extension of time, until January 8, 2021, to serve and file opposition papers. Petitioner may serve and file his reply (traverse) no later than 30 days from the date upon which he receives the opposition papers. If Respondent fails either to serve and file opposition papers or to request a further extension of time by the deadline, the Court may deem the Petition unopposed. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this order to Pro Se Petitioner., (Responses due by 1/8/2021) (Signed by Magistrate Judge Andrew E. Krause on 12/18/2020) (nb) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Antoine v. Warden | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.
