Cuevas Nunez v. Garland
| ADRIANA YADIRA CUEVAS NUNEZ |
| MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL |
| 21-134 |
| May 24, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 12, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 30
MANDATE ISSUED A. Wallace TASHIMA, Morgan B. CHRISTEN, Eric D. MILLER [Entered: 06/12/2023 02:55 PM]
|
|
Filing 29
MEMORANDUM DISPOSITION (A. Wallace TASHIMA, Morgan B. CHRISTEN, Eric D. MILLER) The motion for a stay of removal (Dkt. No. 3) is denied as moot. Each party shall bear its own costs. PETITION GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; REMANDED. FILED AND ENTERED JUDGMENT. [Entered: 04/20/2023 09:27 AM]
|
|
Filing 28
ARGUED AND SUBMITTED to A. Wallace TASHIMA, Morgan B. CHRISTEN, Eric D. MILLER . Audio and video recordings of the argument are available on the courts website at #https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/. [Entered: 03/15/2023 10:57 AM] [Edited: 03/15/2023 02:45 PM]
|
|
Filing 27
ACKNOWLEDGMENT of hearing notice filed by Edward Weisz for Petitioner Adriana Yadira Cuevas Nunez. [Entered: 02/28/2023 03:59 PM]
|
|
Filing 26
ACKNOWLEDGMENT of hearing notice filed by Anthony Nardi for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 02/23/2023 10:36 AM]
|
|
Filing 25
ADDED Counsel for Respondent Anthony Nardi for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 02/17/2023 11:21 AM]
|
|
Filing 24
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Anthony Nardi for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 02/17/2023 10:36 AM]
|
|
Filing 23
NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT on Wednesday, March 15, 2023 - 09:00 A.M. - Courtroom 1 - Scheduled Location: Pasadena. View the Oral Argument Calendar for your case #here. NOTE: Although your case is currently scheduled for oral argument, the panel may decide to submit the case on the briefs instead. See Fed. R. App. P. 34. Absent further order of the court, if the court does determine that oral argument is required in this case, you may appear in person at the Courthouse or remotely by video. At this time, even when in person hearings resume, an election to appear remotely by video will not require a motion, and any attorney wishing to appear in person must provide proof of vaccination. If the panel determines that it will hold oral argument in your case, the Clerk's Office will contact you at least two weeks before the argument date to review any requirements for in person appearance or to make any necessary arrangements for remote appearance. Please note however that if you wish to appear remotely by telephone you will need to file a motion requesting permission to do so. Be sure to review the #GUIDELINES for important information about your hearing. If you are the specific attorney or self-represented party who will be arguing, use the ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF HEARING NOTICE filing type in ACMS no later than 28 days before the hearing date. No form or other attachment is required. If you will not be arguing, do not file an acknowledgment of hearing notice. [Entered: 01/03/2023 09:39 AM]
|
|
Filing 22
RESPONSE to notice of case being considered for oral argument filed by Edward Weisz. [Entered: 11/15/2022 09:33 AM]
|
|
Filing 21
NOTICE: This case is being considered for an upcoming oral argument calendar in Pasadena, CA. Please review the Pasadena sitting dates for March 6-10 and March 13-17, 2023 at #http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/court_sessions. If you have an unavoidable conflict on either of the dates, please file Form 32 (#http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/forms/form32.pdf) within 3 business days of this notice using the ACMS filing type Response to Case Being Considered for Oral Argument. Please follow the form's instructions (#http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/forms/form32instructions.pdf) carefully. When setting your argument date, the court will try to work around unavoidable conflicts; the court is not able to accommodate mere scheduling preferences. You will receive notice that your case has been assigned to a calendar approximately 10 weeks before the scheduled oral argument date. If the parties wish to discuss settlement before an argument date is set, they should jointly request referral to the mediation unit by filing a motoin within 3 business days of this notice, using the filing type: Motion to Refer to Mediation. [Entered: 11/15/2022 09:05 AM]
|
|
Filing 20
Paper copies (6) of Answering Brief submitted at DE 18 by Respondent Merrick B. Garland received. [Entered: 01/31/2022 04:37:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 19
ORDER FILED. Answering Brief submitted at DE 18 by Respondent Merrick B. Garland is filed. Within 7 days of this order, Respondent must file 6 copies of the brief in paper format bound with red front cover pages. Each copy must include certification at the end that the copy is identical to the electronic version. The paper copies must be sent to the Clerks principal office. [Entered: 01/25/2022 11:30:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 18
ANSWERING BRIEF submitted for filing by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 01/24/2022 02:08:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 17
ORDER FILED Motion to Extend Time to File Answering Brief (DE 16) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Respondent Answering Brief due 1/24/2022. Optional Reply Brief due 21 days after service of Answering Brief. All briefs shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 31 and 9th Cir. R. 31-2.1. [Entered: 10/20/2021 04:58:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 16
MOTION to extend time to file answering brief filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 10/19/2021 07:33:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 15
ADDED Rachel Louise Browning for Merrick B. Garland Respondent. [Entered: 09/15/2021 09:07:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 14
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Rachel Louise Browning for Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 09/15/2021 08:40:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 13
Paper copies (6) of Opening Brief submitted at DE 11 by Petitioner Adriana Yadira Cuevas Nunez received. [Entered: 08/30/2021 04:06:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 12
CLERK ORDER. Opening Brief submitted at DE 11 by Petitioner Adriana Yadira Cuevas Nunez is filed. Within 7 days of this order, petitioner must file 6 copies of the brief in paper format bound with blue front cover pages. Each copy must include certification at the end that the copy is identical to the electronic version. The paper copies must be sent to the Clerks principal office. [Entered: 08/24/2021 04:05:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 11
OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Petitioner Adriana Yadira Cuevas Nunez. [Entered: 08/24/2021 10:16:00 AM] [Edited: 08/24/2021 03:31:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 10
ORDER FILED Motion to Stay Removal (DE 3) not opposed. [Entered: 07/15/2021 02:26:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 9
STATEMENT OF NON-OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STAY REMOVAL filed by Respondent. [Entered: 07/15/2021 09:42:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 8
CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed. [Entered: 06/09/2021 08:52:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 7
ADDED Rosanne Perry for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 05/25/2021 08:48:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 6
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Rosanne Perry for Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 05/25/2021 05:35:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 5
BRIEFING SCHEDULE NOTICE. Certified Administrative Record due 6/28/2021, Respondent Response to Stay Motion (Filed with PFR) due 7/19/2021, Petitioner Opening Brief due 8/27/2021, Respondent Answering Brief due 10/26/2021. Optional Reply Brief due 21 days after service of Answering Brief. All briefs shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 31 and 9th Cir. R. 31-2.1. Failure of the petitioner to comply with this briefing schedule will result in automatic dismissal of the appeal. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. [Entered: 05/24/2021 02:21:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 4
CASE OPENED. Petition for Review has been received in the Clerk's office of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on 5/24/2021. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 21-134 has been assigned to this case. All communications with the court must indicate this Court of Appeals docket number. Please carefully review the docket to ensure the name(s) and contact information are correct. It is your responsibility to alert the court if your contact information changes. Resources Available For more information about case processing and to assist you in preparing your brief, please review the Case Opening Information (for #attorneys and #pro se litigants), review the #Appellate Practice Guide, and counsel for petitioner(s) should also review the #Immigration Outline and consider contacting the court's #Appellate Mentoring Program for help with the brief and argument. [Entered: 05/24/2021 02:18:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 3
MOTION TO STAY REMOVAL filed by Petitioner(s); REMOVAL STAYED pending further order of the court per General Order 6.4(c). [Entered: 05/24/2021 12:54:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 2
AGENCY DECISION on review dated 4/29/2021. [Entered: 05/24/2021 12:52:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 1
PETITION FOR REVIEW filed by Petitioner(s). [Entered: 05/24/2021 12:51:00 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.
| Search for this case: Cuevas Nunez 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: ADRIANA YADIRA CUEVAS NUNEZ | |
| Represented By: | Mr. Edward Weisz |
| 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 B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL | |
| Represented By: | Mr. Anthony Nardi |
| Represented By: | Ms. Rachel Louise Browning |
| Represented By: | OIL |
| Represented By: | Ms. Rosanne Perry |
| 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.
