Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.MixedFiled Sept. 29, 2025

Keith v. United States of America

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:25-cv-03298
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedureHabeas
In one sentence

In David Keith v. United States, Judge Woods denied Keith’s motion, finding the first claim meritless and the others beyond the rule governing relief from judgments.

Who this affects

David Keith and the United States. The order denied Keith’s motion, denied permission to appeal without paying the filing fee, denied a certificate of appealability, entered judgment for the United States, and closed the civil action.

What happened

David Keith asked the Southern District of New York to grant his motion in his civil action against the United States. The judgment refers to related civil and criminal docket numbers but does not explain the claims in detail.

The court denied the motion. It said Keith’s first claim lacked substantive merit and that his remaining claims were outside Rule 60(b), the rule governing relief from a judgment. The court also denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees and denied a certificate of appealability.

Judge Gregory Woods’s order entered judgment for the United States and closed Keith’s civil action, David Keith v. United States, No. 1:25-cv-3298-GHW.

The detailed version

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

Case
Keith v. United States of America · No. 1:25-cv-03298
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
Sept. 29, 2025

Background

David Keith was the movant in a civil action against the United States. The judgment also lists related civil and criminal docket numbers: 20 CIV 4410 (GHW) and 15 CR 827 (GHW). The opinion text provided does not describe the underlying claims or the specific relief Keith requested.

Ruling on the motion

The court denied Keith’s motion. It stated that Keith’s first claim lacked substantive merit. It further stated that the remaining claims fell outside the scope of Rule 60(b), which governs certain requests for relief from a judgment or order. Because the judgment does not provide the accompanying memorandum’s analysis, the precise reasoning for each claim is not available in the supplied text.

Appeal-related rulings and disposition

The court certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith and therefore denied Keith permission to appeal without paying the filing fee. The court also denied a certificate of appealability under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, finding that Keith had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. The court entered judgment for the United States and stated that Keith’s civil action, No. 1:25-cv-3298-GHW, was closed.

Classification basis

This is a mixed ruling because the court addressed the substance of Keith’s first claim while disposing of the remaining claims on the threshold ground that they were outside Rule 60(b).

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.