Foster v. Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
Petitioner: Christopher Foster
Respondent: Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
Case Number: 1:2015cv00713
Filed: November 5, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office: Cincinnati Office
County: HAMILTON
Presiding Judge: Sandra S Beckwith
Presiding Judge: Karen L. Litkovitz
Nature of Suit: General
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1651
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
November 2, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 162 TRANSFER ORDER - This habeas corpus case is before the Court on Petitioners most recent motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(6)(ECF No re 160 - Accordingly, pursuant to In re Sims, 111 F.3d 45 (6th Cir. 1997), the Clerk is ordered to transfer the instant Motion to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit for its consideration of whether to permit Foster to proceed. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 11/2/21. (pb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification, and COA TEAM 2 CA06-ECF-PetitionsForFiling@ca6.uscourts.gov by Electronic Notification Modified on 11/2/2021 (pb).
July 21, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 158 TRANSFER ORDER - Accordingly, pursuant to In re Sims, 111 F.3d 45 (6th Cir. 1997), the Clerk is ordered to transfer the instant Motion to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit for its consideration of whether to permit Foster to pr oceed. re 157 filed by Christopher Foster. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 7/20/21. (pb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification, and COA TEAM 2)
March 19, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 149 TRANSFER ORDER - Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk transfer this matter to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals for consideration under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b) of whether Petitioner may proceed in this Court. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 3/19/2020. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
February 18, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 146 ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation re 145 Report and Recommendation denying 144 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 2/18/20. (ba)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
April 1, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 129 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON MOTION TO ALTER JUDGMENT - Petitioner's Motion to Alter Judgment 128 should be denied. Objections to R&R due by 4/15/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 4/1/2019. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
February 21, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 125 ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation re 124 Report and Recommendation denying 123 Motion to Amend/Correct. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 2/21/19. (ba)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
February 1, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 124 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - This habeas corpus cases is before the Court on Petitioners Motion to Amend under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) (ECF No. 123 ). In the Motion Foster purports to state a claim for release from custody under the First Step Act wh ich he asserts applies retroactively to his case. Final judgment was entered in this case on July 24, 2017 (ECF No. 82 ). Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e) allows a motion to alter or amend a judgment to be made within thirty days after judgment is entered. Bec ause the instant Motion was not filed1 until January 18, 2019, it is grossly untimely and should be DENIED. Purely as a matter of information, should Petitioner be tempted to find another vehicle to present this claim, the Magistrate Judge notes th at the First Step Act applies only to federal prisoners. Objections to R&R due by 2/15/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 2/1/2019. (srb)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
January 14, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 121 ORDER MOTION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY- Therefore Petitioners Motion for Certificate of Appealability is DENIED. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 1/14/19. (kma)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
December 27, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 117 ORDER overruling re 111 and 115 Objection to Magistrate Judge Order; this matter is transferred to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals for that court's consideration of whether or not to grant permission to proceed; and this matter remains cl osed. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 12/27/18. (Copy of this order will be emailed to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals by the Clerk.) (ba)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
May 15, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 105 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - It is respectfully recommended that Foster's Motion (ECF No. 104) be denied. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a certificate of appealability and the Co urt should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 5/29/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 5/15/2018. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
April 4, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 98 ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation re 97 Report and Recommendation denying 95 Motion; denying 96 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 4/4/18. (ba)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
March 16, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 97 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON MOTIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION - Foster's two Motions for reconsideration 95 96 do not persuade the Magistrate Judge that this Court's judgment is in error. It is therefore respectfully recommended that they be denied. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a certificate of appealability and the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 3/30/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 3/16/2018. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
March 5, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 94 ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation re 85 Report and Recommendation denying 83 Motion. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 3/5/18. (ba)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
August 14, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 85 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is respectfully recommended that Petitioner's "Motion for Relief from an Order (ECF No. 81) Filed Based on Excusable Neglect and Inadvertence to the Merits" (ECF No. 83) be DENIED. Objections to R&R due by 8/28/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 8/14/2017. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
July 24, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 81 ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 41 61 71 Report and Recommendations; granting 52 Motion to Dismiss; and denying 71 Motion for Judgment; the 1 Petition is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 7/24/17. (ba)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
March 10, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 61 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Because his Petition fails to state a claim on which federal habeas corpus relief can be granted and his claims are otherwise procedurally defaulted, it is respectfully recommended that the Petition be DISMISSED WITH PRE JUDICE. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a certificate of appealability and the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore s hould not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 3/24/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 3/10/2017. Associated Cases: 1:15-cv-00713-MRB-MRM, 1:16-cv-00846-MRB-SKB (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
November 17, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 41 ORDER ON NON-DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS; REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON MOTION TO DISMISS - Petitioner's Motion to Strike (ECF No. 19), Motion Amending Summary Judgment for Default and Default Judgment on Respondent (ECF No. 20) and Motion and Memorandum Recovered (ECF No. 38) are DENIED. It is respectfully recommended that the Motion to Dismiss be GRANTED and this case be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion, Petitioner should be denied a cert ificate of appealabilityand the Court should certify to the Sixth Circuit that any appeal would be objectively frivolous and therefore should not be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis. Objections to R&R due by 12/5/2016. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 11/17/2016. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
February 10, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 3 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that this matter be Dismissed for lack of prosecution. Objections to R&R due by 2/29/2016. Signed by Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz on 2/10/2016. (art)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.) Modified on 2/10/2016 (jlw).
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 Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Foster v. Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Christopher Foster
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: Warden, Toledo Correctional Institution
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?