Ekamveen Singh v. Thomas Giles et al
Ekamveen Singh |
William Barr, Thomas Giles and Kevin McAleenan |
2:2019cv08592 |
October 4, 2019 |
US District Court for the Central District of California |
Consuelo B Marshall |
John E McDermott |
Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee |
28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on January 6, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 6 Receipt of Order of Remand filed. (mrgo) |
Filing 5 STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Consuelo B. Marshall. READ THIS ORDER CAREFULLY. It controls this case and may differ in some respects from the Local Rules. (ys) |
Filing 4 ORDER RETURNING CASE FOR REASSIGNMENT by Judge Christina A. Snyder. ORDER case returned to the Clerk for random reassignment pursuant to General Order 19-03. Case randomly reassigned from Judge Christina A. Snyder to Judge Consuelo B. Marshall for all further proceedings. The case number will now reflect the initials of the transferee Judge 2:19-cv-08592 CBM(JEMx). (rn) |
Filing 3 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Christina A. Snyder and Magistrate Judge John E. McDermott. (jtil) |
Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Petitioner Ekamveen Singh. (Shah, Nilima) |
Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus by a Person in Federal Custody (28 USC 2241), Receipt No. 0973-24559707 for $5 filing fee, filed by petitioner Ekamveen Singh. (Attorney Nilima Patel Shah added to party Ekamveen Singh(pty:pet))(Shah, Nilima) |
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 California Central 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.