CONTANT v. LINDSAY

CONTANT v. LINDSAY

Petitioner:	ISAN CONTANT
Respondent:	CAMERON LINDSAY
Case Number:	3:2011cv00204
Filed:	September 9, 2011
Court:	US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
Office:	Johnstown Office
County:	Clearfield
Presiding Judge:	Kim R. Gibson
Presiding Judge:	Maureen P. Kelly
Nature of Suit:	General
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2241
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
October 25, 2011	Filing 8 ORDER re ECF No. 2 , Order directing Answer to the Petition for Habeas Corpus; re ECF No. 4 , Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by ISAN CONTANT; and re ECF No. 6 , Motion for Miscellaneous Relief filed by ISAN CONTANT: Petitioner's Moti on for Response Time Reduction, ECF No. 6 is GRANTED in part, to the extent that the Order of Court entered September 28, 2011, ECF No. 2 is hereby MODIFIED to require that the Respondent file his Answer by November 2, 2011, rather than 60 days f rom date of being served with the petition. Further, Respondent is ordered to file a response to Petitioner's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ECF No. 4 by by 11/2/2011. The parties are permitted to file an appeal to the District Judge by November 1, 2011. Any appeal will not act as a stay of this order unless otherwise ordered by the District Judge. Signed by Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly on 10/25/2011. A copy of this order is being sent to Petitioner at his address of record and to the U.S. Attorney's Office by mail as well as being hand delivered to the U.S. Attorney's Office today. (tmr)

Date Filed

Document Text

October 25, 2011

Filing 8 ORDER re ECF No. 2 , Order directing Answer to the Petition for Habeas Corpus; re ECF No. 4 , Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by ISAN CONTANT; and re ECF No. 6 , Motion for Miscellaneous Relief filed by ISAN CONTANT: Petitioner's Moti on for Response Time Reduction, ECF No. 6 is GRANTED in part, to the extent that the Order of Court entered September 28, 2011, ECF No. 2 is hereby MODIFIED to require that the Respondent file his Answer by November 2, 2011, rather than 60 days f rom date of being served with the petition. Further, Respondent is ordered to file a response to Petitioner's Motion for Preliminary Injunction, ECF No. 4 by by 11/2/2011. The parties are permitted to file an appeal to the District Judge by November 1, 2011. Any appeal will not act as a stay of this order unless otherwise ordered by the District Judge. Signed by Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly on 10/25/2011. A copy of this order is being sent to Petitioner at his address of record and to the U.S. Attorney's Office by mail as well as being hand delivered to the U.S. Attorney's Office today. (tmr)

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

Search for this case: CONTANT v. LINDSAY
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: ISAN CONTANT
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: CAMERON LINDSAY
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?