NGUYEN v. MAYORKAS et al
| DUY NGUYEN |
| Alejandro Mayorkas, Ur M. Jaddou and Merrick B. Garland |
| 3:2023cv00557 |
| March 28, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of California |
| Cathy Ann Bencivengo |
| Daniel E Butcher |
| Other Statutes: Administrative Procedures Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision |
| 05 U.S.C. ยง 0702 Administrative Procedure Act - Right of Review |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 25, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 Dismissal Without Prejudice [Doc. No. #7 ]. Signed by Judge Cathy Ann Bencivengo on 4/25/2023. (anh) |
| Filing 8 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Merrick B. Garland, Ur M. Jaddou, Alejandro Mayorkas re #7 Joint MOTION to Dismiss (Prime, Caroline) (aas). |
| Filing 7 Joint MOTION to Dismiss by Merrick B. Garland, Ur M. Jaddou, Alejandro Mayorkas. (Prime, Caroline)Attorney Caroline Clark Prime added to party Merrick B. Garland(pty:dft), Attorney Caroline Clark Prime added to party Ur M. Jaddou(pty:dft), Attorney Caroline Clark Prime added to party Alejandro Mayorkas(pty:dft) (aas). |
| Filing 6 Judge Cathy Ann Bencivengo and Magistrate Judge Daniel E. Butcher assigned to transfer case from District of Columbia. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(no document attached) (smy1) |
| Filing 5 Case transferred in from District of District of Columbia; Case Number 1:22-cv-03408. Original file received electronically |
MINUTE ORDER: The #4 Consent Motion to Transfer and Extend is hereby GRANTED. A court may transfer a case to another district "where it might have been brought" "[f]or the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice." 28 U.S.C. 1404(a). Moreover, a transfer motion is proper to any district in "which all parties have consented." Id.; see also Choi v. Matal, 266 F. Supp. 3d 150, 151 (D.D.C. 2017). It is undisputed that venue is proper in the Southern District of California because Plaintiff resides there. Further, both parties consent to transfer. It is therefore ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall transfer this action to the Southern District of California. It is further ORDERED that Defendants' time to respond to the complaint is extended through, and including, 21 days after this action is docketed in the transferee district. Signed by Judge Tanya S. Chutkan on 12/30/2022. (lcss) [Transferred from District of Columbia on 3/29/2023.]
|
| Filing 4 Consent MOTION to Transfer Case , Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer re #1 Complaint, by MERRICK B. GARLAND, UR M. JADDOU, ALEJANDRO MAYORKAS. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order)(Caplen, Robert) [Transferred from District of Columbia on 3/29/2023.] |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Robert Aaron Caplen on behalf of All Defendants (Caplen, Robert) [Transferred from District of Columbia on 3/29/2023.] |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS (4) Issued Electronically as to All Defendants, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (Attachments: #1 Notice and Consent)(zljn) [Transferred from District of Columbia on 3/29/2023.] |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ADCDC-9654027) filed by DUY NGUYEN. (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 Summons, #3 Summons, #4 Summons, #5 Exhibit, #6 Exhibit, #7 Exhibit, #8 Civil Cover Sheet)(Kholodovsky, Brian) [Transferred from District of Columbia on 3/29/2023.] |
| Case Assigned to Judge Tanya S. Chutkan. (zljn) [Transferred from District of Columbia on 3/29/2023.] |
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 Southern 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.
