Lico, et al. v. Garland
| CLARISA MANLAPIG LICO and BUENAVENTURA LAGADAN LICO, JR. |
| MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL |
| 22-1152 |
| July 6, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 21, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 28 MANDATE ISSUED Eric D. MILLER, Lucy H. KOH, Donald W. Molloy [Entered: 08/21/2023 11:22 AM] |
| Filing 27 MEMORANDUM DISPOSITION (Eric D. MILLER, Lucy H. KOH, Donald W. Molloy) The temporary stay of removal remains in effect until the issuance of the mandate. (See Dkt. 2.). PETITION DENIED. FILED AND ENTERED JUDGMENT. [Entered: 06/28/2023 11:01 AM] |
| Filing 26 SUBMITTED ON THE BRIEFS to Eric D. MILLER, Lucy H. KOH, Donald W. Molloy. [Entered: 06/05/2023 11:59 AM] |
Filing 25
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. Therefore, this case is ordered submitted without oral argument on June 5, 2023, in San Francisco, California. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). [Entered: 05/23/2023 02:55 PM]
|
| Filing 24 ACKNOWLEDGMENT of hearing notice filed by Cindy Siuhuei Chang for Petitioner Clarisa Manlapig Lico, Petitioner Buenaventura Lagadan Lico, Jr.. [Entered: 05/16/2023 01:10 PM] |
| Filing 23 CORRESPONDENCE filed by Petitioner Clarisa Manlapig Lico, Petitioner Buenaventura Lagadan Lico, Jr.. [Entered: 05/16/2023 10:48 AM] |
| Filing 22 DEFECTIVE --- RESPONSE to notice of case being considered for oral argument filed by Cindy Siuhuei Chang. [Wrong filing type used, correct entry is DE 23.] [Entered: 05/15/2023 05:48 PM] [Edited: 05/16/2023 10:52 AM] |
| Filing 21 ACKNOWLEDGMENT of hearing notice filed by Enitan Otunla for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 05/15/2023 04:32 PM] |
| Filing 20 NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT on Monday, June 5, 2023 - 09:00 A.M. - Courtroom 1 - 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: 03/27/2023 09:58 AM] |
| Filing 19 NOTICE: This case is being considered for an upcoming oral argument calendar in San Francisco, CA. Please review the San Francisco 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 motoin within 3 business days of this notice, using the filing type: Motion to Refer to Mediation. [Entered: 02/22/2023 08:15 AM] |
| Filing 18 Paper copies (6) of Answering Brief submitted at DE 16 by Respondent Merrick B. Garland received. [Entered: 01/13/2023 05:15 PM] |
|
Filing 17
ORDER FILED. Answering Brief submitted at DE 16 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: 01/06/2023 04:14 PM]
|
| Filing 16 ANSWERING BRIEF submitted for filing by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 01/06/2023 07:18 AM] |
| Filing 15 Paper copies (6) of Opening Brief submitted at DE 13 by Clarisa Manlapig Lico and Buenaventura Lagadan Lico, Jr. received 11/18/2022. [Entered: 11/21/2022 12:24 PM] |
|
Filing 14
ORDER FILED. Opening Brief submitted at DE 13 by Petitioners Clarisa Manlapig Lico and Buenaventura Lagadan Lico, Jr. is filed. Within 7 days of this order, Petitioners 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: 11/14/2022 03:40 PM]
|
| Filing 13 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Petitioner Clarisa Manlapig Lico, Petitioner Buenaventura Lagadan Lico, Jr.. [Entered: 11/09/2022 04:16 PM] |
|
Filing 12
ORDER FILED. Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Opening Brief for 30 days (DE 11) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Immigration Petitioner Opening Brief due 11/10/2022, Immigration Respondent Answering Brief due 1/9/2023. 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: 10/03/2022 01:12:00 PM]
|
| Filing 11 STREAMLINED request for extension of time to file opening brief for 30 days filed by Petitioner Clarisa Manlapig Lico, Petitioner Buenaventura Lagadan Lico, Jr.. [Entered: 10/03/2022 12:15:00 PM] |
|
Filing 10
ORDER FILED. The government has filed a statement of non-opposition to the motion for stay of removal. The temporary stay of removal continues until the mandate issues unless the court orders otherwise.See 9th Cir. Gen. Ord. 6.4(c). [Entered: 08/31/2022 12:03:00 PM]
|
| Filing 9 STATEMENT OF NON-OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STAY REMOVAL filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 08/31/2022 10:49:00 AM] |
| Filing 8 CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed by DOJ Executive Office Of Immigration Review. [Entered: 08/05/2022 04:07:00 AM] |
| Filing 7 ADDED Enitan Otunla for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 07/07/2022 08:26:00 AM] |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Enitan Otunla for Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 07/07/2022 06:35:00 AM] |
| Filing 5 BRIEFING SCHEDULE NOTICE. Certified Administrative Record due 8/10/2022, Respondent Response to Stay Motion (Filed with PFR) due 8/31/2022, Petitioner Opening Brief due 10/11/2022, Respondent Answering Brief due 12/8/2022. 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: 07/06/2022 02:33:00 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 7/6/2022. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 22-1152 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: 07/06/2022 02:31:00 PM] |
| Filing 3 AGENCY DECISION on review dated 6/23/2022. [Entered: 07/06/2022 01:45:00 PM] |
| Filing 2 MOTION TO STAY REMOVAL filed by Petitioner(s); REMOVAL STAYED pending further order of the court per General Order 6.4(c). [Entered: 07/06/2022 01:45:00 PM] |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR REVIEW filed by Petitioner(s). [Entered: 07/06/2022 01:44:00 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
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.
