Laiq Khan v. William Barr, U. S. Atty Gen
| LAIQ KHAN |
| MATTHEW G. WHITAKER, ACTING U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL and WILLIAM P. BARR, U. S. ATTORNEY GENERAL |
| 19-60059 |
| January 22, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| Laiq Khan v. William Barr, U. S. Atty Gen |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 1, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| BRIEFING NOTICE ISSUED A/Pet's Brief Due on 04/10/2019 for Petitioner Laiq Khan. [19-60059] (DDL) [Entered: 03/01/2019 01:25 PM] |
| IMMIGRATION RECORD FILED. [19-60059] (DOJ Executive Office of Immigration Review ) [Entered: 02/28/2019 01:00 PM] |
| LETTER OF ADVISEMENT. Reason: providing parties with revised caption to be used in all future filings. [19-60059] (RLL) [Entered: 02/21/2019 02:44 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney(s) Joanna Leigh Watson for party(s) Respondent Matthew G. Whitaker, Acting U. S. Attorney General, in case 19-60059 [19-60059] (CB) [Entered: 01/24/2019 10:01 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [19-60059] (Joanna Leigh Watson ) [Entered: 01/23/2019 09:45 AM] |
| INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete, Action: Case OK to Process. [8966942-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. [19-60059] (CB) [Entered: 01/23/2019 10:04 AM] |
| IMMIGRATION CASE docketed. Petition for review filed by Petitioner Mr. Laiq Khan. Date received in 5th Circuit: 01/22/2019. Immigration File Number: a209 159 340 Administrative Record due on 03/04/2019 [19-60059] (CB) [Entered: 01/22/2019 03:34 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.
