Son v. Kane
Petitioner: Choun Son
Respondent: Katrina S Kane
Case Number: 2:2010cv02248
Filed: October 21, 2010
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Pinal
Presiding Judge: Jay R Irwin (PS)
Presiding Judge: Susan R Bolton
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
March 25, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER ADOPTING 17 Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as the order of this Court. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The Clerk shall enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Susan R Bolton on 3/25/11. (LSP)
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 Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Son v. Kane
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Choun Son
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: Katrina S Kane
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?