Lee-Thomas v. Antonelli
| Gary Justin Lee-Thomas |
| B. M. Antonelli |
| 3:2021cv00187 |
| December 17, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia |
| Gina M Groh |
| Robert W Trumble |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 4, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 RETURN RECEIPT as to #9 Roseboro Notice. SERVICE ACCEPTED on 2/1/2022. (je) |
Filing 9
ORDER AND ROSEBORO NOTICE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Trumble on 1/26/2022. (je) Copy mailed to pro se Petitioner by CMRR. (Additional attachment(s) added on 1/26/2022: #1 Certified Mail Return Receipt) (je).
|
| Filing 8 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM or in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment by B. M. Antonelli. (Attachments: #1 Attachment Memorandum in Support, #2 Exhibit 1 Facey Dec, #3 Exhibit 2 Shaw Dec, #4 Attachment A, #5 Attachment B, #6 Attachment C, #7 Attachment D, #8 Attachment E, #9 Attachment F)(McKee (USA), Morgan) |
| Filing 7 RETURN RECEIPT as to #4 Order. SERVICE ACCEPTED on 12/27/2021 per USPS website. (cmd) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Morgan McKee (USA) on behalf of B. M. Antonelli (McKee (USA), Morgan) (Main Document 6 replaced on 12/23/2021 to pdf version) (je). |
| Filing 5 RETURN RECEIPT as to #2 Notice. SERVICE ACCEPTED on 12/20/2021. (je) |
|
Filing 4
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Robert W. Trumble on 12/22/2021. (je) Copy mailed to Petitioner by CMRR. Copy generated by NEF and regular mail to AUSA. (Additional attachment(s) added on 12/22/2021: #1 Certified Mail Return Receipt) (je).
|
| Filing 3 Filing fee: $ 5.00, receipt number WVNC003359. (je) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE OF GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR APPEARING PRO SE IN FEDERAL COURT. Mailed to pro se Petitioner by CMRR. (je) (Additional attachment(s) added on 12/17/2021: #1 Certified Mail Return Receipt) (je). |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus against B. M. Antonelli, filed by Gary Justin Lee-Thomas. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A - Incident Report 1/24/19, #2 Exhibit B - Officer Report, #3 Exhibit C - Request for Administrative Remedy, #4 Exhibit D - Incident Report 1/24/19, #5 Exhibit E - Inmate Discipline Update, #6 Exhibit F - Notice of Discipline 2/22/19, #7 Exhibit G - Inmate Rights at Discipline Hearing, #8 Exhibit H - Advisement of Incident Report Delay, #9 Exhibit I - Investigation report, #10 Exhibit J - Administrative Remedy Appeal, #11 Exhibit K - Administrative Remedy Appeal Response, #12 Envelope)(je) |
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.
- 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: Lee-Thomas v. Antonelli | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Gary Justin Lee-Thomas | |
| 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: B. M. Antonelli | |
| Represented By: | Sharon L. Potter |
| Represented By: | Morgan McKee (USA) |
| 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.
