Estrada Sanchez v. Garland
| RONY MAURICIO ESTRADA SANCHEZ |
| MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL |
| 21-577 |
| August 18, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 7, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 40
MANDATE ISSUED Milan D. SMITH, Jr., Roopali H. DESAI, Carol Bagley Amon [Entered: 08/07/2023 09:11 AM]
|
|
Filing 39
MEMORANDUM DISPOSITION (Milan D. SMITH, Jr., Roopali H. DESAI, Carol Bagley Amon) The petition for review is DENIED. FILED AND ENTERED JUDGMENT. [Entered: 06/15/2023 02:48 PM]
|
|
Filing 38
SUBMITTED ON THE BRIEFS to Milan D. SMITH, Jr., Roopali H. DESAI, Carol Bagley Amon. [Entered: 06/08/2023 01:52 PM]
|
|
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 the decisional process would not be significantly aided by oral argument. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). This case will be submitted on the briefs and record, without oral argument, on June 8, 2023 in Pasadena, California. [Entered: 05/05/2023 02:21 PM]
|
|
Filing 36
NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT on Thursday, June 8, 2023 - 09:30 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: 03/27/2023 11:18 AM]
|
|
Filing 35
NOTICE: This case is being considered for an upcoming oral argument calendar in Pasadena, CA. Please review the Pasadena sitting dates for June 2023 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 motion within 3 business days of this notice, using the filing type: Motion to Refer to Mediation. [Entered: 02/24/2023 11:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 34
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 11:09 AM]
|
|
Filing 33
Paper copies (6) of Reply Brief submitted at DE 31 by Petitioner Rony Mauricio Estrada Sanchez received. [Entered: 08/12/2022 01:50:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 32
ORDER FILED. Reply Brief submitted at DE 31 by Petitioner Rony Mauricio Estrada Sanchez 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: 07/15/2022 04:51:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 30
DEFECTIVE --- ANSWERING BRIEF submitted for filing by Petitioner Rony Mauricio Estrada Sanchez. [Entered: 07/15/2022 12:00:00 AM]--[Wrong filing type, correct entry is DE 31] [Edited: 07/15/2022 04:48:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 31
REPLY BRIEF submitted for filing by Petitioner Rony Mauricio Estrada Sanchez. [Entered: 07/15/2022 12:02:00 AM]--[COURT UPDATE: Backdated entry to original submission date (07/14/2022)] [Edited: 07/15/2022 04:49:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 29
Paper copies (6) of Answering Brief submitted at DE 27 by Respondent Merrick B. Garland received 07/08/2022. [Entered: 07/11/2022 12:03:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 28
ORDER FILED. Answering Brief submitted at DE 27 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: 06/23/2022 01:01:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 27
ANSWERING BRIEF submitted for filing by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 06/23/2022 12:24:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 26
ORDER FILED. Respondent's unopposed motion (Docket Entry No. 25) for an extension of time to file the answering brief is granted. The respondent's answering brief is due June 23, 2022. The optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [Entered: 05/17/2022 01:40:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 25
MOTION to extend time to file answering brief filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 05/17/2022 08:24:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 24
ORDER FILED.Respondent's unopposed motion (Docket Entry No. 23) for an extension of time to file the answering brief is granted. The respondent's answering brief is due May 24, 2022. The optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [Entered: 03/18/2022 01:47:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 23
MOTION to extend time to file answering brief filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 03/18/2022 11:31:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 22
Paper copies (6) of Opening Brief submitted at DE 18 by Petitioner Rony Mauricio Estrada Sanchez, I received. [Entered: 02/02/2022 03:47:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 21
ADDED Aric Allan Anderson for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 01/28/2022 01:23:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 20
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Aric Allan Anderson for Merrick B. Garland replacing Nehal Kamani. [Entered: 01/28/2022 01:12:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 19
ORDER FILED. Opening Brief submitted at DE 18 by Petitioner Rony Mauricio Estrada Sanchez, I 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: 01/25/2022 12:01:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 18
OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Petitioner Rony Mauricio Estrada Sanchez, I. [Entered: 01/24/2022 11:18:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 17
ORDER FILED. Motion to Extend Time to File Opening Brief (DE 16) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Petitioner Opening Brief due 1/24/2022, Respondent Answering Brief due 3/25/2022. 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: 12/27/2021 01:51:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 16
MOTION to extend time to file opening brief filed by Petitioner Rony Mauricio Estrada Sanchez, I. [Entered: 12/17/2021 12:36:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 15
ORDER FILED. Motion to Extend Time to File Opening Brief (DE 14) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Petitioner Opening Brief due 12/22/2021, Respondent Answering Brief due 2/22/2022. 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: 11/29/2021 04:52:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 14
MOTION to extend time to file opening brief filed by Petitioner Rony Mauricio Estrada Sanchez, I. [Entered: 11/24/2021 01:19:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 13
ORDER FILED. Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Opening Brief for 30 days (DE 12) denied. The request is late. The filer must file a motion per 9th Cir. R. 31-2.2(b). [Entered: 11/24/2021 08:57:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 12
STREAMLINED request for extension of time to file opening brief for 30 days filed by Petitioner Rony Mauricio Estrada Sanchez, I. [Entered: 11/23/2021 11:47:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 11
ORDER FILED Motion to Stay Removal (DE 8) not opposed. [Entered: 10/07/2021 01:01:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 10
STATEMENT OF NON-OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STAY REMOVAL filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 10/07/2021 11:39:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 9
Motion to Stay Removal filed at DE 8; Respondent Response to Stay Motion (Filed after PFR) due 10/15/2021. [Entered: 09/24/2021 10:20:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 8
SUPPLEMENTAL MOTION TO STAY REMOVAL filed by Petitioner(s); REMOVAL STAYED pending further order of the court per General Order 6.4(c). [Entered: 09/23/2021 11:47:00 PM] [COURT ENTERED UPDATE: docket updated on 9/24/21 to reflect filing is supplemental motion to stay removal; DE 2 includes inital motion to stay removal] [SM] [Edited: 09/24/2021 10:58:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 7
CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed. [Entered: 09/08/2021 10:24:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 6
ADDED Nehal Kamani for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 08/19/2021 01:29:00 PM]
|
|
Filing 5
NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Nehal Kamani for Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 08/19/2021 10:07:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 4
BRIEFING SCHEDULE NOTICE. Certified Administrative Record due 9/22/2021, Petitioner Opening Brief due 11/22/2021, Respondent Answering Brief due 1/20/2022. 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. 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: 08/18/2021 09:37:00 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 8/17/2021. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 21-577 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: 08/18/2021 09:30:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 2
PETITION FOR REVIEW AND MOTION TO STAY REMOVAL filed by Petitioner(s). [Entered: 08/17/2021 05:32:00 PM] [COURT ENTERED UPDATE: docket text updated on 9/24/21 to reflect that filing includes motion to stay removal] [SM] [Edited: 09/24/2021 10:56:00 AM]
|
|
Filing 1
AGENCY DECISION on review dated 7/19/2021. [Entered: 08/17/2021 05:30:00 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: Estrada Sanchez 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: RONY MAURICIO ESTRADA SANCHEZ | |
| Represented By: | Gianfranco De Girolamo |
| 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. Aric Allan Anderson |
| 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.
