Hanxu Lu v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services et al
| Hanxu Lu |
| United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Ur Mendoza Jaddou and Alissa Emmel |
| 8:2024cv00745 |
| April 4, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Dean D Pregerson |
| Autumn D Spaeth |
| 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 April 5, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 60 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendants Alissa Emmel, Ur Mendoza Jaddou, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services. (car) |
| Filing 6 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (car) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Dean D. Pregerson and Magistrate Judge Autumn D. Spaeth. (car) |
| Filing 4 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71) #2 , Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 filed by Plaintiff Hanxu Lu. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit A)(Shu, Han) |
| Filing 3 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Hanxu Lu, (Shu, Han) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Hanxu Lu. (Shu, Han) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-37229925 - Fee: $405, filed by Plaintiff Hanxu Lu. (Attorney Han Shu added to party Hanxu Lu(pty:pla))(Shu, Han) |
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.
