Gillman v. Hollingsworth

Filing 23

ORDER ENTERED: Petitioner's motion 21 for order and extension of time is denied. Signed by Senior District Judge Richard D. Rogers on 9/13/2012. (Mailed to pro se party Steven A. Gillman by regular mail.) (smnd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

STEVEN A. GILLMAN,
Petitioner,
v.

CASE NO.

11-3228-RDR

WARDEN C. MAYE,
Respondent.
O R D E R
This petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2241 was dismissed as moot by Order entered on
August 16, 2012.

After the Order of Dismissal and Judgment were

entered, the clerk received and docketed

a Motion for Order

apparently submitted by petitioner before he received notice of
the dismissal.

Respondent has filed a Response to this motion.

The court denies petitioner’s motion as moot.1

The request for

court action included by respondent in his response is not in
proper motion form, but if it were it would likewise be denied
as moot.
IT

IS

THEREFORE

BY

THE

COURT

ORDERED

that

petitioner’s

Motion for Order and Extension of Time (Doc. 21) is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
1

Petitioner suggests in his motion that “if the court rules in his
favor” he will file a motion for costs. No such motion is before the court
and, in any event, petitioner refers to no authority that would entitle him
to receive costs in a pro se habeas corpus action.

DATED:

This 13th day of September, 2012, at Topeka, Kansas.

s/RICHARD D. ROGERS
United States District Judge