TINNEN v. MOSER
| LASHUN TRACY TINNEN |
| WARDEN MOSER |
| 3:2022cv00191 |
| October 21, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania |
| Lisa Pupo Lenihan |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 9, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 Return of Service Returned Executed by LASHUN TRACY TINNEN. MOSER served on 11/21/2022, answer due 1/20/2023. (keh) |
| Filing 8 CONSENT to Trial/Jurisdiction by US Magistrate Judge OR District Judge Option, by MOSER. (Cressler, April) |
| Filing 7 NOTICE of Appearance by April Cressler on behalf of MOSER. (Cressler, April) |
| Filing 6 Remark: Service copies were forwarded to the U.S. Marshal. Text-only entry. No PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (jmb) |
Filing 5
ORDER DIRECTING that that the United States Marshal shall make service of the (ECF No. 4) Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus upon the respondents, Merrick B. Garland, the United States Attorney General in Washington, D.C., Warden Moser and the United States Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania at Suite 400, U.S. Post Office and Courthouse, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Service shall be by certified mail and the costs of service shall be advanced by the United States. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a rule is issued upon respondents, returnable sixty (60) days after service of process, to show cause why the writ should not be granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties are allowed fourteen (14) days from this date to appeal this order to a district judge pursuant to 72.C.2 of the local rules. Failure to appeal within fourteen (14) days may constitute waiver of the right to appeal. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on 11/04/2022. (jmb)
|
| Filing 4 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by LASHUN TRACY TINNEN. (keh) |
| Filing 3 Filing fee: $5.00, receipt number 200001060 (keh) |
|
Filing 2
Order directing the Clerk of Court to mark this CASE CLOSED. Petitioner may submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, along with a certified copy of the inmate account statement for the six (6) months preceding the filing of his Petition. If that motion is granted, the case will be reopened. Petitioner may also reopen this case by paying the $5.00 filing fee. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lisa Pupo Lenihan on October 27, 2022. (kcb)
|
| Filing 1 Remark: Habeas Petition lodged without Motion for In Forma Pauperis or payment of filing fee (sms) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: TINNEN v. MOSER | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: LASHUN TRACY TINNEN | |
| 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 MOSER | |
| Represented By: | April Cressler |
| 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.
