Vasquez-Ramos v. Asher
Petitioner: Luis Arturo Vasquez-Ramos
Respondent: Nathalie R. Asher
Case Number: 2:2014cv01465
Filed: September 22, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Washington
Office: Seattle Office
County: King
Presiding Judge: James L. Robart
Presiding Judge: Mary Alice Theiler
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
December 2, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER OF DISMISSAL AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 10 Report and Recommendations by Judge James L. Robart. (MD)
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 Washington Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Vasquez-Ramos v. Asher
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Luis Arturo Vasquez-Ramos
Represented By: Brian Patrick Conry
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: Nathalie R. Asher
Represented By: US Attorney Habeas
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.


Why Is My Information Online?