Perez-Domingo v. Garland
| FRANCISCO PEREZ-DOMINGO |
| MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL |
| 21-449 |
| July 26, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 9, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 44
MANDATE ISSUED Susan P. GRABER, Michelle T. FRIEDLAND, Eric D. MILLER [Entered: 12/09/2022 10:54 AM]
|
|
Filing 43
ORDER FILED. Susan P. GRABER, Michelle T. FRIEDLAND, Eric D. MILLER Judges Friedland and Miller have voted to deny the petition for rehearing en banc, and Judge Graber so recommends. The full court has been advised of the petition, and no judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matter en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35. The petition for rehearing en banc, filed November 7, 2022, is DENIED. [Entered: 11/30/2022 09:48 AM]
|
|
Filing 42
PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC filed by Petitioner Francisco Perez-Domingo. [Entered: 11/07/2022 08:53 AM]
|
|
Filing 41
MEMORANDUM DISPOSITION (Susan P. GRABER, Michelle T. FRIEDLAND, Eric D. MILLER) We deny the motion (Dkt. No. 27) to take judicial notice of a Genocide Watch report. Our review is limited to facts within the administrative record and the agencys findings of fact. Fisher v. INS, 79 F.3d 955, 963 (9th Cir. 1996) (en banc). We cannot take judicial notice of a country conditions report that Perez-Domingo did not submit to the agency. See Singh v. Ashcroft, 393 F.3d 903, 906 (9th Cir. 2004). The motion for a stay (Dkt. No. 10) is DENIED. The temporary stay of removal is lifted. PETITION DENIED. FILED AND ENTERED JUDGMENT. [Entered: 09/26/2022 12:32:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 40
SUBMITTED ON THE BRIEFS to Susan P. GRABER, Michelle T. FRIEDLAND, Eric D. MILLER. [Entered: 09/22/2022 02:20:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 39
ADDED Counsel for Respondent Jeffrey Michael Hartman for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 08/12/2022 10:17:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 38
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Jeffrey Michael Hartman for Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 08/12/2022 06:25:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 37
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 September 22, 2022, in San Francisco, California. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). [Entered: 08/05/2022 11:03:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 36
NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT on Thursday, September 22, 2022, - 09:00 A.M. - Courtroom 1 - 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: 07/25/2022 09:57:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 35
TERMINATED participation of Jeffrey Michael Hartman representing Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 07/07/2022 01:54:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 34
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Jeffrey Michael Hartman for Merrick B. Garland replacing Jeffrey Michael Hartman, replacing OIL. [Entered: 07/07/2022 12:25:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 33
NOTICE: This case is being considered for an upcoming oral argument calendar in San Francisco, CA on September 22, 2022 or September 23, 2022. Please review the San Francisco, CA sitting dates for September 2022 and the 2 subsequent sitting months in that location 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: 05/31/2022 12:19:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 32
ORDER FILED. Petitioners motion (Docket Entry No. 27) for judicial notice, the proposed exhibit included in Docket Entry No. 27, the opposition at Docket Entry No. 30, and any further responses are referred to the panel that will consider the merits of the case. Any discussion of the proposed exhibit in the petitioners brief may be stricken or disregarded if the merits panel denies the motion for judicial notice. [Entered: 03/30/2022 03:08:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 31
Paper copies (6) of Reply Brief submitted at DE 26 by Petitioner Francisco Perez-Domingo received. [Entered: 03/17/2022 03:49:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 30
RESPONSE to Motion for Judicial Notice (DE 27) filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 03/17/2022 12:26:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 29
ORDER FILED. Reply Brief submitted at DE 26 by Petitioner Francisco Perez-Domingo is filed. Within 7 days of this order, Petitioner must file 6 copies of the brief in paper format bound with gray 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: 03/10/2022 12:36:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 28
DEFECTIVE --- CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed. [Entered: 03/10/2022 12:21:00 PM] Filed in wrong case, meant for different case. Removed from docket per request from filer. [Edited: 03/10/2022 05:26:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 27
MOTION for judicial notice filed by Petitioner Francisco Perez-Domingo. [Entered: 03/10/2022 11:04:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 26
REPLY BRIEF submitted for filing by Petitioner Francisco Perez-Domingo. [Entered: 03/10/2022 11:02:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 25
Paper copies (6) of Answering Brief submitted at DE 21 by Respondent Merrick B. Garland received 01/31/2022. [Entered: 02/01/2022 12:17:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 24
ORDER FILED. Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Reply Brief for 30 days (DE 23) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Petitioner Reply Brief due 3/21/2022. All briefs shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 31 and 9th Cir. R. 31-2.1. [Entered: 01/27/2022 04:03:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 23
STREAMLINED request for extension of time to file reply brief for 30 days filed by Petitioner Francisco Perez-Domingo. [Entered: 01/27/2022 10:44:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 22
ORDER FILED. Answering Brief submitted at DE 21 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: 01/27/2022 10:27:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 21
ANSWERING BRIEF submitted for filing by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 01/27/2022 07:06:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 20
Paper copies (6) of Opening Brief submitted at DE 16 by Petitioner Francisco Perez-Domingo received. [Entered: 12/06/2021 04:40:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 19
ADDED Richard Kelley for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 12/02/2021 10:27:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 18
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Richard Kelley for Merrick B. Garland replacing OIL. [Entered: 12/02/2021 07:40:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 17
ORDER FILED. Opening Brief submitted at DE 16 by Petitioner Francisco Perez-Domingo 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: 11/30/2021 10:14:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 16
OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Petitioner Francisco Perez-Domingo. [Entered: 11/29/2021 02:21:00 PM]
|
|
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 11/29/2021, Respondent Answering Brief due 1/27/2022. 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: 09/23/2021 03:27:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 14
STREAMLINED request for extension of time to file opening brief for 30 days filed by Petitioner Francisco Perez-Domingo. [Entered: 09/23/2021 03:12:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 13
OPPOSITION to motion to stay removal filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 09/17/2021 11:41:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 12
CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed. [Entered: 08/30/2021 07:57:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 11
CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed. [Entered: 08/26/2021 08:26:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 10
SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION TO STAY REMOVAL filed by Petitioner(s). [Entered: 08/06/2021 08:40:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 9
DEFECTIVE --- MOTION TO STAY REMOVAL filed by Petitioner(s); REMOVAL STAYED pending further order of the court per General Order 6.4(c). [Entered: 08/06/2021 02:19:00 PM] Wrong filing type used. Correct entry at DE #10. [Edited: 08/06/2021 08:56:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 8
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Jeffrey Michael Hartman for Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 07/26/2021 12:13:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 7
ADDED Jeffrey Michael Hartman for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 07/26/2021 10:48:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 6
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Jeffrey Michael Hartman for Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 07/26/2021 10:35:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 5
BRIEFING SCHEDULE NOTICE. Certified Administrative Record due 8/30/2021, Respondent Response to Stay Motion (Filed with PFR) due 9/20/2021, Petitioner Opening Brief due 10/29/2021, Respondent Answering Brief due 12/28/2021. 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: 07/26/2021 09:35:00 AM] Resent notice to include document link. [Edited: 09/03/2021 05:11:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 4
MOTION TO STAY REMOVAL filed by Petitioner(s); REMOVAL STAYED pending further order of the court per General Order 6.4(c). [Entered: 07/26/2021 09:31:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 3
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 7/25/2021. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 21-449 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: 07/26/2021 09:28:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 2
AGENCY DECISION on review dated 7/23/2021. [Entered: 07/25/2021 12:38:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 1
PETITION FOR REVIEW filed by Petitioner(s). [Entered: 07/25/2021 12:38:00 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: Perez-Domingo 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: FRANCISCO PEREZ-DOMINGO | |
| Represented By: | Ms. Siovhan Sheridan Ayala |
| 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, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL | |
| Represented By: | Jeffrey Michael Hartman |
| Represented By: | Mr. Richard Kelley |
| 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.
