Ramos v. Barr
| Gabriel Ramos, AKA Jose Nunez, AKA Carlos Almonte, AKA Luis Ramirez, AKA Joselo Nunez, AKA Gabriel Ramos |
| William P. Barr, United Sates Attorney General |
| 20-1696 |
| May 29, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Second Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 5, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 DEFECTIVE DOCUMENT, Notice of Appearance as Substitute Counsel, [14], on behalf of Respondent William P. Barr, FILED.[2855338] [20-1696] [Entered: 06/05/2020 08:40 AM] |
| Filing 14 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AS SUBSTITUTE COUNSEL, on behalf of Respondent William P. Barr, FILED. Service date 06/05/2020 by CM/ECF. [2855297] [20-1696] [Entered: 06/05/2020 12:44 AM] |
| Filing 13 DEFECTIVE DOCUMENT, PETITION FOR REVIEW, [1], on behalf of Petitioner Gabriel Ramos, copy to pro se appellant, FILED.[2851227] [20-1696] [Entered: 06/01/2020 10:25 AM] |
| Filing 11 DEFECTIVE DOCUMENT, MOTION, to extend time to file petition for review, [6], on behalf of Petitioner Gabriel Ramos, copy to pro se petitioner, FILED.[2851130] [20-1696] [Entered: 06/01/2020 09:24 AM] |
| Filing 10 DEFECTIVE DOCUMENT, MOTION, for stay of removal, [3], on behalf of Petitioner Gabriel Ramos, copy to pro se petitioner, FILED.[2851116] [20-1696] [Entered: 06/01/2020 09:20 AM] |
| Filing 8 INSTRUCTIONAL FORMS, to Pro Se litigant, SENT.[2851107] [20-1696] [Entered: 06/01/2020 09:12 AM] |
| Filing 7 PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AGENCY ORDER, SERVED. [2851103] [20-1696] [Entered: 06/01/2020 09:08 AM] |
| Filing 6 MOTION, to extend time to file petition for review, on behalf of Petitioner Gabriel Ramos, FILED. Service date 05/29/2020 by No service.[2851102] [20-1696] [Entered: 06/01/2020 09:06 AM] |
| Filing 5 ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND NOTICE OF APPEARANCE FORM, on behalf of Petitioner Gabriel Ramos, FILED. Service date 05/26/2020 by US mail.[2851099] [20-1696] [Entered: 06/01/2020 09:04 AM] |
| Filing 4 MOTION, for assignment of pro bono counsel, to proceed in forma pauperis, on behalf of Petitioner Gabriel Ramos, FILED. Service date 05/26/2020 by US mail.[2851097] [20-1696] [Entered: 06/01/2020 09:03 AM] |
| Filing 3 MOTION, for stay of removal, on behalf of Petitioner Gabriel Ramos, FILED. Service date 05/26/2020 by US mail.[2851092] [20-1696] [Entered: 06/01/2020 08:59 AM] |
| Filing 2 AGENCY DECISION AND ORDER, dated 05/14/2020, RECEIVED.[2851087] [20-1696] [Entered: 06/01/2020 08:55 AM] |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR REVIEW OF AGENCY ORDER, on behalf of Petitioner Gabriel Ramos, FILED. [2851084] [20-1696] [Entered: 06/01/2020 08:51 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: Ramos v. Barr | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: Gabriel Ramos, AKA Jose Nunez, AKA Carlos Almonte, AKA Luis Ramirez, AKA Joselo Nunez, AKA Gabriel Ramos | |
| Represented By: | Gabriel Ramos |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: William P. Barr, United Sates Attorney General | |
| Represented By: | OIL |
| Represented By: | Lisa Marie Arnold |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
