Zhang v. Allen
| Jeff Baoliang Zhang |
| Kristine Crandall, Director, USCIS Texas Service Center and Jon Allen, Director |
| 24-10429 |
| May 15, 2024 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Prisoner - Civil Rights |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on July 8, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 APPELLANT'S BRIEF FILED by Mr. Jeff Baoliang Zhang. Additionally the Brief requires INSUFFICIENT FOR: RECORD CITATIONS NOT IN PROPER FORMAT. Instructions to Attorney: PLEASE READ THE ATTACHED NOTICE FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO REMEDY THE DEFAULT. # of Copies Provided: 0 A/Pet's Brief deadline satisfied. Sufficient Brief due on 07/26/2024 for Appellant Jeff Baoliang Zhang. [24-10429] (RSM) [Entered: 07/12/2024 09:26 AM] |
| Filing 9 BRIEFING NOTICE ISSUED A/Pet's Brief due on 07/15/2024 for Appellant Jeff Baoliang Zhang. [24-10429] (MRW) [Entered: 06/03/2024 02:00 PM] |
| Filing 7 ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL FILED. Admitted Exhibits on File in District Court? No. Video/Audio Exhibits on File in District Court? No Electronic ROA deadline satisfied. [24-10429] (MRW) [Entered: 06/03/2024 01:30 PM] |
| Filing 6 ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED from District Court for 3:22-CV-2904. Electronic ROA due on 05/31/2024. [24-10429] (MRW) [Entered: 05/16/2024 11:10 AM] |
| Filing 5 INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete. Action: Case OK to Process. [5] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. [24-10429] (MRW) [Entered: 05/16/2024 11:07 AM] |
| Filing 1 PRISONER CASE WITHOUT COUNSEL docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Mr. Jeff Baoliang Zhang [24-10429] (CAS) [Entered: 05/15/2024 02:33 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.