Esogbue v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services et al
| Ambrose O Esogbue |
| United States Homeland Security and United States Citizenship and Immigration Services |
| 2:2019cv03233 |
| May 16, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Steven P Logan |
| Immigration: Other Immigration Actions |
| 08 U.S.C. ยง 1329 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 11, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Ambrose O Esogbue. (MSA) |
| Filing 10 Additional Attachments to Main Document re: #9 Order. (MSA) |
Filing 9
ORDER- Plaintiff's #6 Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs is denied without prejudice. If Plaintiff fails to either pay the $350.00 filing fee and $50.00 administrative fee or file a complete Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, the Clerk of Court must enter a judgment of dismissal of this action without prejudice and without further notice to Plaintiff and deny any pending unrelated motions as moot. See document for complete details. Signed by Judge Steven P Logan on 6/21/19. (MSA)
|
| Filing 8 REQUEST BY NON-PRISONER PRO SE PARTY FOR ELECTRONIC NOTICING filed by Ambrose O Esogbue. Pro se parties must promptly notify the Clerks Office, in writing, if there is a change in designated e-mail address or mailing address. (MSA) |
| Filing 7 MOTION to Waive MIDP Requirements by Ambrose O Esogbue. (2 pages) (MSA) |
| Filing 6 APPLICATION for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis by Ambrose O Esogbue. (MSA) |
| Filing 5 MINUTE ORDER: When bringing an action, a plaintiff must either pay a filing fee of $350, plus an administrative fee of $50, or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis without prepayment of fees. If Plaintiff fails to submit the filing fee or an application to proceed in forma pauperis within 30 days, this action will be dismissed without prejudice and without further notice. (Attachments: #1 IFP)(EJA) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE TO THE PARTIES - The Court is participating in the Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot (MIDP) and this case is subject to that pilot. The key features and deadlines are set forth in the attached Notice which includes General Order 17-08. Also attached is a checklist for use by the parties. All parties must respond to the mandatory initial discovery requests set forth in the General Order before initiating any further discovery in this case. Please note: The discovery obligations in the General Order supersede the disclosures required by Rule 26(a)(1). Any party seeking affirmative relief must serve a copy of the attached documents (Notice to Parties, including General Order 17-08 and MIDP Checklist) on each new party when the Complaint, Counterclaim, Crossclaim, or Third-Party Complaint is served. (EJA) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE TO SELF-REPRESENTED LITIGANT re informational documents attached: (1) Notice to Self-Represented Litigant, (2) Federal Court Self-Service Clinic Flyer, (3) Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2, and (4) Notice and Request re Electronic Noticing. (EJA) |
| Filing 2 This case has been assigned to the Honorable Steven P Logan. All future pleadings or documents should bear the correct case number: CV-19-03233-PHX-SPL. Notice of Availability of Magistrate Judge to Exercise Jurisdiction form attached. (EJA) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT/Petition for Coram Nobis filed by Ambrose O Esogbue. (21 pages) (Attachments: #1 envelope)(EJA) |
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
