Milkiyas Amba v. Loretta Lynch
Petitioner: MILKIYAS KARATO AMBA
Respondent: LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General of the United States
Case Number: 15-3747
Filed: December 10, 2015
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date Filed Description
September 27, 2016 Milkiyas Amba v. Loretta Lynch

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 27, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 702851175 Filed Nonprecedential Disposition PER CURIAM. Petition for Review is DENIED. Frank H. Easterbrook, Circuit Judge; Diane S. Sykes, Circuit Judge and Lynn Adelman, District Court Judge. [6785882-1] [6785882] [15-3747]
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: Milkiyas Amba v. Loretta Lynch
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: MILKIYAS KARATO AMBA
Represented By: Ann Ruth Peters
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: LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General of the United States
Represented By: OIL
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?