Jorge Saenz v. Kevin McAleenan, Acting Secy, et al
| KEVIN K. MCALEENAN, ACTING SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, LEE CISSNA, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Director and MARK SIEGL |
| JORGE ALBERTO SAENZ |
| 19-20268 |
| April 22, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 20, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| COURT ORDER filed that appellant's unopposed motion to stay this appeal, including briefing, pending the issuance of an opinion in No. 18-20784, Duarte v. McAleenan, is GRANTED. [ # 9076153-2 ] [19-20268] (DMS) [Entered: 06/20/2019 10:44 AM] |
| UNOPPOSED MOTION filed by Appellant Mr. Jorge Alberto Saenz to stay further proceedings in this court. Reason: Identical case Duarte v. McAleenan, Cause No. 18-20784, which will materially affects the outcome of this case, is pending in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Date of service: 06/14/2019 via email - Attorney for Appellee: Belgau; Attorney for Appellant: Gonzalez [19-20268] (Raed Gonzalez ) [Entered: 06/14/2019 01:53 PM] |
| ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL FILED. Exhibits on File in District Court? No. Electronic ROA deadline satisfied. [19-20268] (ABT) [Entered: 05/30/2019 01:28 PM] |
| BRIEFING NOTICE ISSUED A/Pet's Brief Due on 07/09/2019 for Appellant Jorge Alberto Saenz. [19-20268] (ABT) [Entered: 05/30/2019 01:29 PM] |
| CLERK ORDER denying Motion to consolidate cases filed by Appellant Mr. Jorge Alberto Saenz [ # 9051870-2 ]; denying Motion to suspend briefing notice filed by Appellant Mr. Jorge Alberto Saenz [ # 9051870-3 ] [19-20268] (CAS) [Entered: 05/16/2019 09:44 AM] |
| UNOPPOSED MOTION filed by Appellant Mr. Jorge Alberto Saenz to consolidate cases 19-20268, 19-20290, 19-20297 to main case 18-20784 for briefing and oral argument purposes, to suspend briefing notice dated 04/29/2019 [9051870-3]. Date of service: 05/10/2019 [19-20268] (CAS) [Entered: 05/14/2019 09:37 AM] |
| TRANSCRIPT ORDER received advising transcript unnecessary for appeal purposes. [19-20268] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: TRANSCRIPT ORDER received from Appellant Mr. Jorge Alberto Saenz advising transcript unnecessary for appeal purposes. Date of Service: 05/10/2019 via email - Attorney for Appellee: Belgau; Attorney for Appellant: Gonzalez [19-20268] (Raed Gonzalez ) [Entered: 05/10/2019 03:01 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Raed Gonzalez for Appellant Jorge Alberto Saenz in 19-20268 [19-20268] (MAS) [Entered: 05/02/2019 02:47 PM] |
| INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete, Action: Case OK to Process. [9043813-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. [19-20268] (LLL) [Entered: 05/02/2019 03:29 PM] |
| ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED FROM DISTRICT COURT for 4:18-CV-2418. Electronic ROA due on 05/17/2019. [19-20268] (LLL) [Entered: 05/02/2019 03:32 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM received from Mr. Raed Gonzalez, Esq. for Mr. Jorge Alberto Saenz for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [19-20268] (Raed Gonzalez ) [Entered: 05/01/2019 05:32 PM] |
| TRANSCRIPT ORDER received from Appellant Mr. Jorge Alberto Saenz advising transcript unnecessary for appeal purposes. [19-20268] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: TRANSCRIPT ORDER received from Appellant Mr. Jorge Alberto Saenz advising transcript unnecessary for appeal purposes. Date of Service: 05/01/2019 via email - Attorney for Appellee: Belgau; Attorney for Appellant: Gonzalez [19-20268] (Raed Gonzalez ) [Entered: 05/01/2019 05:37 PM] |
| US CIVIL CASE docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Jorge Alberto Saenz [19-20268] (LLL) [Entered: 04/22/2019 01:50 PM] |
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.
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.
