Andres Mejia-Castillo, et al v. Jeffrey Rosen
| MAYRA DE LOS ANGELES TOBAR SERRANO, ANDRES DE JESUS MEJIA-CASTILLO, LUIS ANGEL MEJIA-TOBAR and DAYANA MELISSA MEJIA TOBAR |
| JEFFREY A. ROSEN, Acting Attorney General |
| 20-73716 |
| December 18, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| ANDRES MEJIA-CASTILLO, ET AL V. MERRICK GARLAND |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 24, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Willam P. Barr substituted by Jeffrey A. Rosen effective 12/24/2020 [Created 12/23/2020 by AUTOUPD][11944609]. [20-73716] (CD) [Entered: 12/23/2020 08:01 PM] |
| Filing 3 Added Attorney(s) Shahrzad Baghai for party(s) Respondent William P. Barr, in case 20-73716. [11934804] (NAC) [Entered: 12/21/2020 11:41 AM] |
| Filing 2 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Shahrzad Baghai (Department of Justice) for Respondent William P. Barr. Date of service: 12/21/2020. (Party was previously proceeding with counsel.) [11934795] [20-73716] (Baghai, Shahrzad) [Entered: 12/21/2020 11:39 AM] |
| Filing 1 FILED BIA Petition for Review. PRO SE. Petitioner detained? NO. Certified Administrative Record due 01/22/2021. Petitioner opening brief due 03/23/2021 for Andres De Jesus Mejia Csastillo, et al.. Respondent brief due 05/24/2021 for William P. Barr, Attorney General. Petitioner optional reply brief is due 21 days from service of respondent brief. [11933049][COURT UPDATE: New Documents Attached, resent NDA,--[Edited 12/21/2020 by BY] (BY) [Entered: 12/18/2020 01:15 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.
