Seyed Moosavian Feizabadi v. Merrick Garland et al
| Seyed Mohammadamin Moosavian Feizabadi |
| MERRICK GARLAND, SECRETARY ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Director UR MENDOZA JADDOU, DIRECTOR David Radel, Director Christopher Wray, Alejandro Mayorkas, Ur Mendoza Jaddou, David Radel, Christopher Wray and Does 1 through 10, inclusive |
| 2:2022cv04547 |
| July 2, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Alka Sagar |
| Other Immigration Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 12, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
(IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar.Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE no later than September 6, 2022 why this action should not be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute. (see document for further details) (hr)
|
| Filing 9 Joint STIPULATION to Stay Case pending Adjudication of Application filed by Defendants Merrick Garland, Ur Mendoza Jaddou, Alejandro Mayorkas, David Radel, Christopher Wray. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Attorney Joanne I. Osinoff added to party Merrick Garland(pty:dft), Attorney Joanne I. Osinoff added to party Ur Mendoza Jaddou(pty:dft), Attorney Joanne I. Osinoff added to party Alejandro Mayorkas(pty:dft), Attorney Joanne I. Osinoff added to party David Radel(pty:dft), Attorney Joanne I. Osinoff added to party Christopher Wray(pty:dft))(Osinoff, Joanne) |
| Filing 8 REMINDER NOTICE re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. Each party must file form CV-11C within the consent deadlines pursuant to L.R. 73-2. Additionally, the parties are directed to L.R. 73-2.2 Proof of Service. In any case in which only a magistrate judge is initially assigned, plaintiff must file a proof of service within 10 days of service of the summons and complaint as to each defendant. (hr) |
|
Filing 7
MINUTE (In Chambers) ORDER by Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. This action has been assigned to the calendar of Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar under the Civil Consent Pilot Project. The parties are reminded to review the time requirements for consent set forth in the Notice to Counsel that was issued at the time of the filing of the complaint. Plaintiff is instructed to forthwith serve a copy of this Order on all parties that have already been served with the summons and complaint, or to serve all parties with a copy of this Order at the time of service of the summons and complaint. (hr)
|
| Filing 6 60 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants Merrick Garland, Ur Mendoza Jaddou, Alejandro Mayorkas, David Radel, Christopher Wray. (sh) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE TO COUNSEL re Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program. This case has been randomly assigned to Magistrate Judge Alka Sagar. (Attachments: #1 CV-11C) (sh) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by plaintiff Seyed Mohammadamin Moosavian Feizabadi, (Parvand, Mohammad) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Seyed Mohammadamin Moosavian Feizabadi. (Parvand, Mohammad) |
| Filing 2 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by plaintiff Seyed Mohammadamin Moosavian Feizabadi. (Parvand, Mohammad) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-33570554 - Fee: $402, filed by plaintiff Seyed Mohammadamin Moosavian Feizabadi. (Attorney Mohammad Ali Parvand added to party Seyed Mohammadamin Moosavian Feizabadi(pty:pla))(Parvand, Mohammad) |
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.
