Thacker v. Warden, Noble Correctional Institution
Frank J Thacker |
Warden, Noble Correctional Institution |
1:2022cv00572 |
October 3, 2022 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
Douglas R Cole |
Chelsey M Vascura |
Habeas Corpus (General) |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on March 6, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 11 ORDER dismissing #5 Motion to Stay; granting #8 Motion to Dismiss #5 Motion to Stay; granting #9 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer. Respondant's answer due 2/3/2023. Signed by Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura on 11/28/2022. (agm)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.) |
Filing 9 First MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer New date requested 2/3/2023. Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by Respondent Warden, Noble Correctional Institution. (Lamb, William) |
Filing 8 STATUS REPORT and Motion to Dismiss re #5 Motion to Stay by Petitioner Frank J Thacker. (pb) Modified on 11/21/2022 (pb). |
Filing 7 RELATED CASE MEMORANDUM ORDER: The Judges agree that case numbers 1:22-cv-572 and 1:21-cv-704 are NOT related. Signed by Judge Douglas R. Cole and Judge Matthew W. McFarland on 11/17/2022. (kh) (This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.) |
Filing 6 ORDER: Respondent is ORDERED to file a response to the Motion WITHIN TWENTY-ONE DAYS of the date of this Order. Petitioner may file and serve a reply WITHIN FOURTEEN DAYS thereafter. Signed by Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura on 11/16/2022. (daf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.) |
Set/Reset Deadlines as to #5 MOTION to Stay. Responses due by 12/7/2022 (daf) |
Filing 5 MOTION FOR STAY OF ACTION by Petitioner, Frank J Thacker. (bjr) |
Filing 4 ORDER: Respondent is ORDERED to file an answer conforming to the requirements of Rule 5 of the Rules Governing 2254 Cases WITHIN SIXTY DAYS of the date of filing of this Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura on 10/6/2022. (daf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.) |
Filing 2 Filing Fee Received: $ 5.00, receipt number 100000508. (kl) |
Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Frank J Thacker. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Receipt) (kl) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Thacker v. Warden, Noble 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: Frank J Thacker | |
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, Noble Correctional Institution | |
Represented By: | William H Lamb |
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.