Ayer v. Garland et al
| Clement Makung Ayer |
| Merrick B Garland, Alejandro Mayorkas, Tae D Johnson, Henry Lucero, G Ozuna and FE Figueroa |
| 2:2022cv00316 |
| February 28, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Michelle H Burns (PS) |
| Diane J Humetewa |
| Prisoner: Alien Detainee - Habeas Corpus |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 31, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 MINUTE ORDER: Pursuant to Petitioner's #5 Motion under Rule 41(a), construed as a Notice of Voluntary Dismissal, this civil case is hereby terminated. This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (LFIG) |
| Filing 5 EX PARTE First MOTION to Dismiss Case by Clement Makung Ayer. (CastanedaAcosta, Rocio) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Rocio CastanedaAcosta on behalf of Clement Makung Ayer. (CastanedaAcosta, Rocio) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT (REK) |
| Filing 2 MEMORANDUM of Points and Authorities in Support of #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Fed/2241) by Petitioner Clement Makung Ayer. (33 Pages) (REK) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Fed/2241). Filing fee received: $ 5.00, receipt number PHX235653 filed by Clement Makung Ayer. (21 Pages and Envelope) (Attachments: #1 Envelope)(REK) |
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.
