Gonzalez-Espitia v. Garland
Petitioner: FERNANDO GONZALEZ-ESPITIA
Respondent: MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Case Number: 21-297
Filed: June 23, 2021
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date Filed Description
March 29, 2023 GONZALEZ-ESPITIA V. GARLAND

Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 22, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 22, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 33 MANDATE ISSUED Danny J. Boggs, Milan D. SMITH, Jr., John B. OWENS [Entered: 05/22/2023 01:26 PM]
March 29, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 32 MEMORANDUM DISPOSITION (Danny J. Boggs, Milan D. SMITH, Jr., John B. OWENS) DISMISSED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. FILED AND ENTERED JUDGMENT. [Entered: 03/29/2023 10:14 AM]
March 27, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 31 SUBMITTED ON THE BRIEFS to Danny J. Boggs, Milan D. SMITH, Jr., John B. OWENS. [Entered: 03/27/2023 11:17 PM]
February 22, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER FILED. The court is of the unanimous opinion that the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the briefs and record and that oral argument would not significantly aid the decisional process. Therefore, this matter is ordered submitted on the briefs and record without oral argument on Monday, March 27, 2023, in San Francisco, California. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). [Entered: 02/22/2023 10:06 AM]
January 17, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 29 NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT on Monday, March 27, 2023 - 09:00 A.M. - Courtroom 3 - Scheduled Location: San Francisco 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: 01/17/2023 10:00 AM]
November 17, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 28 NOTICE: This case is being considered for an upcoming oral argument calendar in San Francisco, CA. Please review the San Francisco sitting dates for March 6-10 and March 27-31, 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 motion within 3 business days of this notice, using the filing type: Motion to Refer to Mediation. [Entered: 11/17/2022 04:28 PM]
January 28, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 27 Paper copies (6) of Answering Brief submitted at DE 25 by Respondent Merrick B. Garland received. [Entered: 01/28/2022 11:40:00 AM]
January 25, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 26 ORDER FILED. Answering Brief submitted at DE 25 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 11:51:00 AM]
January 24, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 25 ANSWERING BRIEF submitted for filing by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 01/24/2022 02:34:00 PM]
December 23, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 24 ORDER FILED. Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Answering Brief for 30 days (DE 23) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Respondent Answering Brief due 1/26/2022. 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: 12/23/2021 10:22:00 AM]
December 23, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 23 STREAMLINED request for extension of time to file answering brief for 30 days filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 12/23/2021 06:06:00 AM]
December 23, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 22 DEFECTIVE --- STREAMLINED request for extension of time to file answering brief for 30 days filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 12/23/2021 06:04:00 AM] Duplicate entry. Correct entry at DE 23. [Edited: 12/23/2021 10:21:00 AM]
November 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 21 TERMINATED participation of Jennifer A. Singer representing Merrick B. Garland Respondent. [Entered: 11/15/2021 02:05:00 PM]
November 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 20 ADDED Victor Matthew Lawrence for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 11/15/2021 02:04:00 PM]
November 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 19 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Victor Matthew Lawrence for Merrick B. Garland replacing Jennifer A. Singer, replacing OIL. [Entered: 11/15/2021 09:26:00 AM]
November 10, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 18 Paper copies (6) of Opening Brief submitted at DE 16 by Petitioner Fernando Gonzalez-Espitia received. (Received 11/09/2021) [Entered: 11/10/2021 09:18:00 AM]
October 28, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 17 CLERK ORDER. Opening Brief submitted at DE 16 by Petitioner Fernando Gonzalez-Espitia 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: 10/28/2021 01:25:00 PM]
October 27, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 16 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Petitioner Fernando Gonzalez-Espitia. [Entered: 10/27/2021 09:05:00 PM]
September 15, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER FILED. Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Opening Brief for 30 days (DE 14) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Petitioner Opening Brief due 10/27/2021, Respondent Answering Brief due 12/27/2021. 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. [Entered: 09/15/2021 08:42:00 AM]
September 14, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 14 STREAMLINED request for extension of time to file opening brief for 30 days filed by Petitioner Fernando Gonzalez-Espitia. [Entered: 09/14/2021 09:00:00 PM]
August 6, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER FILED Motion to Stay Removal (DE 3) not opposed. [Entered: 08/06/2021 09:55:00 PM] Resent notice to include document link. [Edited: 09/03/2021 05:44:00 PM]
August 6, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 12 STATEMENT OF NON-OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STAY REMOVAL filed by Respondent. [Entered: 08/06/2021 07:04:00 AM]
July 13, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 11 CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed. [Entered: 07/13/2021 06:13:00 AM]
July 1, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ADDED Sean Paul Perdomo for Petitioner Fernando Gonzalez-Espitia. [Entered: 07/01/2021 08:50:00 AM]
July 1, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 9 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Sean Paul Perdomo for Fernando Gonzalez-Espitia. [Entered: 07/01/2021 06:12:00 AM]
June 28, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ADDED Jennifer A. Singer for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 06/28/2021 10:07:00 AM]
June 28, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 7 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Jennifer A. Singer for Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 06/28/2021 09:53:00 AM]
June 23, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 6 BRIEFING SCHEDULE NOTICE. Certified Administrative Record due 7/28/2021, Respondent Response to Stay Motion (Filed with PFR) due 8/18/2021, Petitioner Opening Brief due 9/27/2021, Respondent Answering Brief due 11/26/2021. 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: 06/23/2021 04:11:00 PM]
June 23, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 5 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 6/23/2021. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 21-297 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: 06/23/2021 04:09:00 PM]
June 23, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 4 AGENCY DECISION on review dated 5/26/2021. [Entered: 06/23/2021 03:10:00 PM]
June 23, 2021 Opinion or Order 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: 06/23/2021 03:09:00 PM]
June 23, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 2 AGENCY DECISION on review dated 5/26/2021. [Entered: 06/23/2021 03:08:00 PM]
June 23, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 1 PETITION FOR REVIEW filed by Petitioner(s). [Entered: 06/23/2021 03:07:00 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: Gonzalez-Espitia 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: FERNANDO GONZALEZ-ESPITIA
Represented By: Mr. Omar Nakib
Represented By: Mr. Sean Paul Perdomo, I, Mr
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. Victor Matthew Lawrence
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?