Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 21, 2025

Keith v. United States

Judge
Alison Nathan
Docket
1:20-cv-04410
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureCriminal
In one sentence

In Keith v. United States, Judge Woods confirmed an August 18 response deadline, denied appeal fee-waiver status, and reassigned future applications.

Who this affects

David Keith, whose response deadline was confirmed and whose ability to proceed without paying appeal fees was denied; future applicants in the listed matters must direct applications to Judge Woods.

What happened

Keith v. United States concerns David Keith’s response to the government’s opposition to his request to vacate his conviction or sentence. Circuit Judge Alison J. Nathan had granted Keith more time to respond while presiding over the matter temporarily.

The response is due by August 18, 2025. The order also says that the matters in the caption have been reassigned, so future applications must be sent to the judge who issued this order.

Judge Gregory H. Woods denied fee-waiver status for any appeal because he found that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. He also directed the clerk to terminate a listed motion and mail Keith a copy of the order.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Keith v. United States · No. 1:20-cv-04410
Judge
Alison Nathan
Date
July 21, 2025

Background

The order concerns matters listed under related criminal and civil docket numbers. On July 17, 2025, Circuit Judge Alison J. Nathan, who was presiding by designation, granted David Keith’s request for more time to respond to the government’s memorandum opposing his motion to vacate. The order states that Keith’s response is due no later than August 18, 2025.

Reassignment

The order states that the matters listed in its caption were reassigned to Judge Gregory H. Woods. All future applications in those matters must be directed to him.

Appeal fee status

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), Judge Woods certified that any appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. He therefore denied fee-waiver status for purposes of an appeal.

Clerk’s instructions and disposition

The clerk was directed to terminate the motion listed at Dkt. No. 154 in the criminal docket identified in the order as 1:15-cr-4410 and to mail Keith a copy of the order. The order does not decide Keith’s underlying motion to vacate.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.