Qi Wang et al v. United States Department of Homeland Security et al
| Qi Wang and Depeng Zhao |
| United States Department of Homeland Security, UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, Los Angeles Asylum Office, David Radel, ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS, Director UR M JADDOU, Ted H. Kim, Matthew D. Emrich, Christopher A Wray and DOES 1 through 10 inclusive |
| 5:2024cv00827 |
| April 18, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Other Statutes: Administrative Procedures Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision |
| 05 U.S.C. ยง 551 Administrative Procedure Act |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 18, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #3 , Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 , Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties #2 filed by Plaintiff Qi Wang, Depeng Zhao. (Thomas, Gihan) |
| Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiffs Qi Wang, Depeng Zhao. (Thomas, Gihan) |
| Filing 2 NOTICE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Qi Wang, Depeng Zhao, (Thomas, Gihan) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-37313019 - Fee: $405, filed by Plaintiff Depeng Zhao, Qi Wang. (Attorney Gihan L Thomas added to party Qi Wang(pty:pla), Attorney Gihan L Thomas added to party Depeng Zhao(pty:pla))(Thomas, Gihan) |
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.
