Doe v. Becerra et al
| John Doe |
| Moises Becerra, Tae D. Johnson, Alejandro Mayorkas and Merrick B. Garland |
| 3:2023cv01890 |
| April 19, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| Araceli Martinez-Olguin |
| Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 21, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 19 JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT filed by Moises Becerra, Merrick B. Garland, Tae D. Johnson, Alejandro Mayorkas. (Jeu, Christopher) (Filed on 5/31/2023) |
| Filing 18 Traverse in Support of Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus byJohn Doe. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Second Kosmo Declaration)(Newman, Etan) (Filed on 5/17/2023) |
| Filing 17 Case Reassigned to District Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers no longer assigned to the case. Notice: The assigned judge participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order No. 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras. (jrs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/11/2023) |
| Filing 16 Declaration of B. Spurling in Support of #14 Response to Habeas Petition filed byMoises Becerra, Merrick B. Garland, Tae D. Johnson, Alejandro Mayorkas. (Related document(s) #14 ) (Jeu, Christopher) (Filed on 5/10/2023) |
| Filing 15 Declaration of N. Gonzalez in Support of #14 Response to Habeas Petition filed byMoises Becerra, Merrick B. Garland, Tae D. Johnson, Alejandro Mayorkas. (Related document(s) #14 ) (Jeu, Christopher) (Filed on 5/10/2023) |
| Filing 14 RESPONSE to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus byMoises Becerra, Merrick B. Garland, Tae D. Johnson, Alejandro Mayorkas. Traverse due by 5/17/2023. (Jeu, Christopher) (Filed on 5/10/2023) |
Filing 13
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE.IT IS ORDERED that this case is reassigned to the Honorable Araceli Martinez-Olguin in the San Francisco division for all further proceedings.1. All future filings shall bear the initials AMO immediately after the case number.2. All case management conference dates are vacated and will be reset by the Court.3. All hearing dates presently scheduled are VACATED. However, existing briefing schedules for motions remain unchanged. Motions must be RENOTICED for hearing before Judge Martinez-Olguin by the moving party for a date consistent with the Courts law and motion calendar, but the renoticing of the hearing does not affect the prior briefing schedule. 4. Deadlines for ADR compliance and discovery cutoff remain unchanged. 5. All pretrial conference and trial dates currently set after August 18, 2023, and all other deadlines associated with the case, will remain in place unless otherwise ordered. 6. All pretrial conference and trial dates scheduled on or before August 18, 2023, are vacated. Other pretrial deadlines (e.g., motions in limine, pretrial statements, proposed joint trial exhibits, etc.) will remain in place. The Court will notify the parties when a status conference will be held to schedule a new pretrial conference and trial dates for affected cases. 7. Matters currently referred to a Magistrate Judge will remain before that Magistrate Judge absent further notice. 8. On or before May 31, 2023, the parties shall file a Joint Case Management Statement (separate statements are appropriate if either party is proceeding without counsel). The statement should not exceed ten pages in length and should address all issues outlined in the #Standing Order for All Judges of the Northern District. The approved form for such statements can be accessed # here. A Joint Case Management Statement is not required in prisoner cases in which the prisoner plaintiff/petitioner is not represented by counsel. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 5/10/2023 FOR THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Mark B. Busby, Clerk of Court (ecg-adi, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/10/2023)
|
| Filing 12 Statement of Non-Opposition re #10 ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym filed byMoises Becerra, Merrick B. Garland, Tae D. Johnson, Alejandro Mayorkas. (Related document(s) #10 ) (Jeu, Christopher) (Filed on 5/1/2023) |
|
Filing 11
ORDER by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers Granting #9 Stipulation re Briefing Schedule on Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. Habeas Answer due by 5/10/2023. Traverse due by 5/17/2023. (eac, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/26/2023)
|
| Filing 10 ADMINISTRATIVE MOTION to Proceed Under Pseudonym filed by John Doe. Responses due by 5/1/2023. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Newman Decl., #2 Declaration Kosmo Dec, #3 Proposed Order)(Newman, Etan) (Filed on 4/26/2023) |
| Filing 9 STIPULATION WITH PROPOSED ORDER re Briefing Schedule on #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by John Doe. (Newman, Etan) (Filed on 4/25/2023) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Christopher Frederick Jeu (Jeu, Christopher) (Filed on 4/25/2023) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned using a proportionate, random, and blind system pursuant to General Order No. 44 to Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers for all further proceedings. Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim no longer assigned to case, Notice: The assigned judge participates in the Cameras in the Courtroom Pilot Project. See General Order No. 65 and http://cand.uscourts.gov/cameras.. Signed by Clerk on 4/21/2023. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Eligibility for Video Recording)(ark, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/21/2023)
|
| Filing 6 CLERK'S NOTICE OF IMPENDING REASSIGNMENT TO A U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE: The Clerk of this Court will now randomly reassign this case to a District Judge because either (1) a party has not consented to the jurisdiction of a Magistrate Judge, or (2) time is of the essence in deciding a pending judicial action for which the necessary consents to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction have not been secured. You will be informed by separate notice of the district judge to whom this case is reassigned. ALL HEARING DATES PRESENTLY SCHEDULED BEFORE THE CURRENT MAGISTRATE JUDGE ARE VACATED AND SHOULD BE RE-NOTICED FOR HEARING BEFORE THE JUDGE TO WHOM THIS CASE IS REASSIGNED. This is a text only docket entry; there is no document associated with this notice. (mkl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/21/2023) |
| Filing 5 CONSENT/DECLINATION to Proceed Before a US Magistrate Judge by John Doe.. (Newman, Etan) (Filed on 4/21/2023) |
| Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Moises Becerra, Merrick B. Garland, Tae D. Johnson, Alejandro Mayorkas. (tn, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/20/2023) |
| Filing 3 Case assigned to Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim. Counsel for plaintiff or the removing party is responsible for serving the Complaint or Notice of Removal, Summons and the assigned judge's standing orders and all other new case documents upon the opposing parties. For information, visit E-Filing A New Civil Case at http://cand.uscourts.gov/ecf/caseopening.Standing orders can be downloaded from the court's web page at www.cand.uscourts.gov/judges. Upon receipt, the summons will be issued and returned electronically. A scheduling order will be sent by Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) within two business days. Consent/Declination due by 5/4/2023. (mbc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/20/2023) |
| Filing 2 Proposed Summons. (Newman, Etan) (Filed on 4/19/2023) |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS PURSUANT TO 28 U.S.C. 2241 - IMMIGRATION HABEAS CASE (Filing Fee: $5.00 receipt number ACANDC-18188067). Filed by John Doe. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Authenticating Declaration of Etan Newman, #2 Exhibit Exhibits A-M, #3 Exhibit Exhibits N-EE, #4 Civil Cover Sheet)(Newman, Etan) (Filed on 4/19/2023) Modified on 4/20/2023 (tn, COURT STAFF). |
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 Northern 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.
