Olvera-Amezcua v. Garland
Petitioner: Rafael Antonio Olvera-Amezcua
Respondent: Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General
Case Number: 22-60107
Filed: February 23, 2022
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date Filed Description
December 28, 2022 Olvera-Amezcua v. Garland

Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on February 24, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
February 24, 2022 INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete. Action: Case OK to Process. [9783918-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. [22-60107] (DLJ) [Entered: 02/24/2022 08:23 AM]
February 23, 2022 The Motion for limted stay of removal filed by Petitioner Mr. Rafael Antonio Olvera-Amezcua in 22-60107 [ # 9783235-2 ], has been made sufficient. Sufficient Motion deadline satisfied. [22-60107] Note: Motion deemed as accepted in its present form in light of chambers returning a ruling before a sufficient version of the motion could be forwarded to the panel. (DLJ) [Entered: 02/23/2022 04:25 PM]
February 23, 2022 COURT ORDER granting motion for limited stay of removal until 03/01/2022, filed by Petitioner Mr. Rafael Antonio Olvera-Amezcua [ # 9783235-2 ]. [22-60107] (DLJ) [Entered: 02/23/2022 04:20 PM]
February 23, 2022 Attorney William C. Minick added as counsel of record for Respondent Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General in 22-60107. [22-60107] (DLJ) [Entered: 02/23/2022 02:37 PM]
February 23, 2022 APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [22-60107] (William Clark Minick ) [Entered: 02/23/2022 01:49 PM]
February 23, 2022 MOTION for limited stay of removal until 03/01/2022 [9783235-2]. Motion NOT Sufficient for following reason(s): Motion does not certify matter is an emergency pursuant to 27.3.1, does not confirm petitioner is in custody, does not confirm petitioner has a scheduled removal date, and a Certificate of Compliance is required. Sufficient Motion due via E-MAIL AS SOON AS POSSIBLE or by no later than on 03/07/2022, for Petitioner Rafael Antonio Olvera-Amezcua. [22-60107] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: MOTION filed by Petitioner Mr. Rafael Antonio Olvera-Amezcua for stay of removal [9783235-2]. Date of service: 02/23/2022, via email - Attorney for Petitioner: Maldonado; Attorney for Respondent: OIL. [22-60107] (Javier N. Maldonado ) [Entered: 02/23/2022 01:55 PM]
February 23, 2022 IMMIGRATION CASE docketed. Petition for review filed by Petitioner Mr. Rafael Antonio Olvera-Amezcua. Date received in 5th Circuit: 02/22/2022. Immigration File Number: A207 370 463. Administrative Record due on 04/04/2022. [22-60107] (DLJ) [Entered: 02/23/2022 10:36 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: Olvera-Amezcua v. Garland
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Rafael Antonio Olvera-Amezcua
Represented By: Javier N. Maldonado
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: Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General
Represented By: William Clark Minick
Represented By: Office of Immigration Litigation
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.


Why Is My Information Online?