Bahman Neshat Effatian v. Scott M. Oudkirk et al
Plaintiff: BAHMAN NESHAT EFFATIAN
Defendant: SCOTT M. OUDKIRK and ANTONY BLINKEN
Case Number: 2:2022cv04181
Filed: June 17, 2022
Court: US District Court for the Central District of California
Presiding Judge: Fernando L Aenlle-Rocha
Referring Judge: Gail J Standish
Nature of Suit: Other Immigration Actions
Cause of Action: 08 U.S.C. ยง 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petition
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on August 2, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
August 2, 2022 Filing 12 STIPULATION Extending Time to Answer the complaint as to Antony Blinken answer now due 9/25/2022; Scott M. Oudkirk answer now due 9/25/2022, re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Defendants Antony Blinken; Scott M. Oudkirk.(Attorney Zakariya Koorosh Varshovi added to party Antony Blinken(pty:dft), Attorney Zakariya Koorosh Varshovi added to party Scott M. Oudkirk(pty:dft))(Varshovi, Zakariya)
July 15, 2022 Filing 11 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Service of Summons and Complaint Returned Executed as to USA #9 , Service of Summons and Complaint Returned Executed as to USA #10 . The following error(s) was/were found: Case number is incorrect or missing. Incorrect form CV-40 proof of service... used for Subsequent Documents, NOT initiating documents...the Complaint. Specific forms for summons and complaint available on court's website. Official Case number is to include assigned Judge and Magistrate's initials to read correctly as: 2:22-cv-04181-FLA-GJSx (Refer to Notice of Assignment docket no. 5). In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (lc)
July 15, 2022 Filing 10 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Bahman Neshat Effatian, upon Defendant Scott M. Oudkirk served on 6/27/2022, answer due 8/26/2022. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to TRACY WILKISON U.S. ATTORNEY. Executed upon the Attorney Generals Office of the United States by delivering a copy to MERRICK GARLAND U.S Attorney General. Executed upon the officer agency or corporation by unspecified means. Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt attached. (Goldstein, Joshua)
July 15, 2022 Filing 9 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Bahman Neshat Effatian, upon Defendant Antony Blinken served on 6/27/2022, answer due 8/26/2022. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon the United States Attorneys Office by delivering a copy to TRACY WILKISON U.S. ATTORNEY. Executed upon the Attorney Generals Office of the United States by delivering a copy to MERRICK GARLAND U.S Attorney General. Executed upon the officer agency or corporation by unspecified means. Service was executed in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Due diligence declaration NOT attached. Registered or certified mail return receipt attached. (Goldstein, Joshua)
June 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 8 INITIAL STANDING ORDER upon filing of the complaint by Judge Fernando L. Aenlle-Rocha. (tf)
June 22, 2022 Filing 7 60 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants Antony Blinken and Scott M. Oudkirk. (jtil)
June 21, 2022 Filing 6 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (jtil)
June 21, 2022 Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Fernando L Aenlle-Rocha and Magistrate Judge Gail J. Standish. (jtil)
June 17, 2022 Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff BAHMAN NESHAT EFFATIAN. (Goldstein, Joshua)
June 17, 2022 Filing 3 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff BAHMAN NESHAT EFFATIAN, (Goldstein, Joshua)
June 17, 2022 Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff BAHMAN NESHAT EFFATIAN. (Goldstein, Joshua)
June 17, 2022 Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-33489669 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff BAHMAN NESHAT EFFATIAN. (Attorney Joshua L. Goldstein added to party BAHMAN NESHAT EFFATIAN(pty:pla))(Goldstein, Joshua)

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 this case: Bahman Neshat Effatian v. Scott M. Oudkirk et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: BAHMAN NESHAT EFFATIAN
Represented By: Joshua L. Goldstein
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 ]
Defendant: SCOTT M. OUDKIRK
Represented By: OIL-DCS Trial Attorney
Represented By: Zakariya Koorosh Varshovi
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 ]
Defendant: ANTONY BLINKEN
Represented By: OIL-DCS Trial Attorney
Represented By: Zakariya Koorosh Varshovi
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?