Lamas Adame v. Garland
Petitioner: JOSE JUAN LAMAS ADAME
Respondent: MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Case Number: 21-72
Filed: May 14, 2021
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 24, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 24, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 23 ORDER FILED. Proceedings in this petition for review are stayed pending this courts en banc decision in De La Rosa-Rodriguez v. Garland, No. 20-71923, or further order of this court. [Entered: 04/24/2023 01:50 PM]
January 25, 2022 Filing 22 Paper copies (6) of Answering Brief submitted at DE 19 by Respondent Merrick B. Garland received 01/24/2022. [Entered: 01/25/2022 04:10:00 PM]
January 21, 2022 Filing 21 Paper copies (6) of Opening Brief submitted at DE 15 by Petitioner Jose Juan Lamas Adame received. [Entered: 01/21/2022 11:50:00 AM]
December 20, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 20 ORDER FILED. Answering Brief submitted at DE 19 by Respondent Merrick B. Garland is filed. Within 7 days of this order, Respondent must file 6 copies of the answering 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. A review of Court records reflects that Petitioner Jose Juan Lamas Adame has not filed paper copies of the opening brief [DE 15] as directed by the Courts order filed on November 19, 2021 [DE 18]. Petitioner Jose Juan Lamas Adame is ordered to file 6 copies of the opening brief in paper format with blue front cover pages, accompanied by certification (attached to the end of each copy of the brief) that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically, for delivery to the Court within 7 days of this order. The paper copies must be sent to the Clerks principal office. [Entered: 12/20/2021 03:51:00 PM]
December 17, 2021 Filing 19 ANSWERING BRIEF submitted for filing by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 12/17/2021 05:41:00 PM]
November 19, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER FILED. Opening Brief submitted at DE 15 by Petitioner Jose Juan Lamas Adame 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: 11/19/2021 10:23:00 AM]
November 19, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 17 ORDER FILED. Motion to Accept Late Filing (DE 16) granted. [Entered: 11/19/2021 10:12:00 AM]
November 15, 2021 Filing 16 MOTION to accept late filing filed by Petitioner Jose Juan Lamas Adame. [Entered: 11/15/2021 05:13:00 PM]--[COURT UPDATE: Attached correct PDF of motion] [Edited: 11/18/2021 09:37:00 AM]
November 11, 2021 Filing 15 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Petitioner Jose Juan Lamas Adame. [Entered: 11/11/2021 08:58:00 PM]--[COURT UPDATE: Attached corrected brief and addendum] [Edited: 11/16/2021 04:33:00 PM]
October 20, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 14 ORDER FILED Motion to Extend Time to File Opening Brief (DE 13) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Petitioner Opening Brief due 11/8/2021, Respondent Answering Brief due 1/7/2022. 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 04:47:00 PM]
October 19, 2021 Filing 13 MOTION to extend time to file opening brief filed by Petitioner Jose Juan Lamas Adame. [Entered: 10/19/2021 05:07:00 PM]
September 28, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER FILED Motion to Extend Time to File Opening Brief (DE 10) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Petitioner Opening Brief due 10/18/2021, Respondent Answering Brief due 12/17/2021. 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: 09/28/2021 04:36:00 PM]
September 17, 2021 Filing 11 DEFECTIVE --- SUPPLEMENT to Motion to Extend Time to File Opening Brief (entry 10) filed by Petitioner Jose Juan Lamas Adame. [Entered: 09/17/2021 09:45:00 AM] No PDF attached. Correct entry at DE 10. [Edited: 09/20/2021 11:40:00 AM]
September 16, 2021 Filing 10 MOTION to extend time to file opening brief filed by Petitioner Jose Juan Lamas Adame. [Entered: 09/16/2021 05:51:00 PM] Attached PDF of motion. [Edited: 09/20/2021 10:05:00 AM]
July 8, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER FILED. Motion to Stay Removal (DE 3) not opposed. [Entered: 07/08/2021 03:55:00 PM]
July 8, 2021 Filing 8 STATEMENT OF NON-OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STAY REMOVAL filed by Respondent. [Entered: 07/08/2021 01:33:00 PM]
June 1, 2021 Filing 7 CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed. [Entered: 06/01/2021 10:36:00 AM]
May 17, 2021 Filing 6 ADDED Lindsay Corliss for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 05/17/2021 09:35:00 AM]
May 17, 2021 Filing 5 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Lindsay Corliss for Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 05/17/2021 04:04:00 AM]
May 14, 2021 Filing 4 BRIEFING SCHEDULE NOTICE. Certified Administrative Record due 6/18/2021, Respondent Response to Stay Motion (Filed with PFR) due 7/9/2021, Petitioner Opening Brief due 8/17/2021, Respondent Answering Brief due 10/18/2021. 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: 05/14/2021 01:19:00 PM]
May 14, 2021 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: 05/14/2021 01:15:00 PM]
May 14, 2021 Filing 2 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 5/14/2021. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 21-72 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: 05/14/2021 01:13:00 PM]
May 14, 2021 Filing 1 PETITION FOR REVIEW filed by Petitioner(s). [Entered: 05/14/2021 12:41:00 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: Lamas Adame 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: JOSE JUAN LAMAS ADAME
Represented By: Gloria Pauline Martinez-Senftner
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: Lindsay Corliss
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?