Verdell v. Warden, Noble Correctional Institution
| Joshua Verdell |
| Warden, Noble Correctional Institution |
| 3:2019cv00188 |
| June 20, 2019 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Michael R Merz |
| Thomas M Rose |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2254 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 8, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Petitioner's Objections are without merit and should be overruled. Because reasonable jurists would not disagree with this conclusion or the conclusions in the Report and Supplemental Report, 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 8/22/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 8/7/2019. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.) |
Filing 9
RECOMMITTAL ORDER - re #5 Report and Recommendations, #3 Objection to Report and Recommendations filed by Joshua Verdell - The District Judge has preliminarily considered the Objections and believes they will bemore appropriately resolved after further analysis by the Magistrate Judge. This matter is hereby returned to the Magistrate Judge with instructionsto file a supplemental report analyzing the Objections and making recommendations based on that analysis. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 8-6-2019. (de)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
|
Filing 8
Notation ORDER granting #7 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis in this Court only. This order does not apply to any possible appeal.. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 08/05/2019. (MRM)
|
| Filing 7 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (The Office of the Clerk is in possession of all necessary service documents) by Petitioner Joshua Verdell. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Mailing Envelope) (kma) |
| Filing 6 OBJECTION to #5 Supplemental Report and Recommendations by Petitioner Joshua Verdell. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope) (kma) |
| Filing 5 SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Petitioner's objections are without merit and should be overruled. 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 7/30/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 7/16/2019. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.) |
|
Filing 4
RECOMMITTAL ORDER - re #2 Report and Recommendations,, #3 Objection to Report and Recommendations filed by Joshua Verdell - The District Judge has preliminarily considered the Objections and believes they will be more appropriately resolved after further analysis by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), this matter is hereby returned to the Magistrate Judge with instructions to file a supplemental report analyzing the Objections and making recommendations based on that analysis. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 7-16-2019. (de)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
|
| Filing 3 OBJECTION to #2 Report and Recommendations by Petitioner Joshua Verdell. (Attachments: #1 Mailing Envelope) (kma) |
| Filing 2 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS - It is respectfully recommended that the Petition be dismissed with prejudice. 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 7/8/2019. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz on 6/21/2019. (kpf)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Joshua Verdell. (kma) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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: Verdell 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: Joshua Verdell | |
| 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 | |
| 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.
