Din v. Barr et al
Petitioner: A Jho Mo Din
Respondent: Jeffrey Searls, Thomas Feeley and William Barr
Case Number: 1:2019cv01253
Filed: September 16, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Western District of New York
Presiding Judge: Lawrence J Vilardo
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 28, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 28, 2019 Filing 5 TEXT ORDER GRANTING #4 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer filed by Thomas Feeley, William Barr, Jeffrey Searls. The respondents' time to answer or otherwise make motions with respect to the habeas petition is extended to 12/4/2019. Issued by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 10/28/2019. (Chambers mailed text order to pro se petitioner, A Jho Mo Din). (CMD)
October 28, 2019 Filing 4 MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Complaint by William Barr, Thomas Feeley, Jeffrey Searls.(Coriell, David)
October 23, 2019 Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by David M. Coriell on behalf of William Barr, Thomas Feeley, Jeffrey Searls (Coriell, David)
September 20, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER that within 45 days of the date of this order, Respondent shall file and serve an answer and a memorandum of law. Petitioner shall have 25 days after his receipt of the respondents' answer to file a written reply. Signed by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 9/20/2019. (Attachments: #1 Petition)(KM) Petitioner mailed a copy of this order.
September 19, 2019 Filing fee: $5.00, receipt number 65864 (SG)
September 16, 2019 Filing 1 PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS against William Barr, Thomas Feeley, Jeffrey Searls, filed by A Jho Mo Din.(SG) Modified title on 9/19/2019 (SG).
September 16, 2019 Pro Se Packet Handed to Plaintiff which included: Privacy Notice, Consent to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge, Civil Case Timeline. (SG)

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Din v. Barr 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: Jeffrey Searls
Represented By: United States Attorney's Office (e-service)
Represented By: David M. Coriell
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: Thomas Feeley
Represented By: United States Attorney's Office (e-service)
Represented By: David M. Coriell
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: William Barr
Represented By: United States Attorney's Office (e-service)
Represented By: David M. Coriell
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: A Jho Mo Din
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?