Santos Abreu v. Barr et al
Petitioner: Jose Frank Santos Abreu
Respondent: Jeffrey Searls, Thomas Feeley and William P. Barr
Case Number: 1:2020cv00372
Filed: March 27, 2020
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 August 5, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 22, 2020 Filing 5 MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION re #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by William P. Barr, Thomas Feeley, Jeffrey Searls. (Luhtaru, Maarja)
May 22, 2020 Filing 4 RESPONSE to #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by William P. Barr, Thomas Feeley, Jeffrey Searls.(Luhtaru, Maarja)
April 20, 2020 Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Maarja T. Luhtaru on behalf of William P. Barr, Thomas Feeley, Jeffrey Searls (Luhtaru, Maarja)
April 8, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 2 ORDER that within 45 days of the service of the date of this order, Respondent shall file and serve an answer and memorandum of law or a motion to dismiss; Petitioner shall have 25 days upon receipt of the answer or motion to file a written response; the Clerk of Court shall serve a copy of the petition and this order, electronically via a Notice of Electronic Filing to the United States Attorney's Office, Western District of New York at USANYW-Immigration-Habeas@usdoj.gov Signed by Hon. Lawrence J. Vilardo on 4/7/20. (Attachments: #1 Petition)(SG)
April 8, 2020 Remark: Clerk mailed a copy of # 2 to Jose Frank Santos Abreu. (MD)
March 27, 2020 Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Jose Frank Santos Abreu.(CGJ)
March 27, 2020 Filing fee received: $5.00, receipt number ROC012161 (CGJ)
March 27, 2020 Remark: Petitioner has been mailed a pro se packet including a privacy notice, consent to proceed before a Magistrate Judge, and a civil case timeline. (CGJ)

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: Santos Abreu 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: Maarja T. Luhtaru
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: Maarja T. Luhtaru
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 P. Barr
Represented By: United States Attorney's Office (e-service)
Represented By: Maarja T. Luhtaru
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: Jose Frank Santos Abreu
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?