Acosta-Ochoa v. Garland
| HECTOR ACOSTA-OCHOA |
| MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL |
| 22-1464 |
| September 2, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 23, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 25 Paper copies (6) of Opening Brief submitted at DE 17 by Petitioner Hector Acosta-Ochoa received. [Entered: 10/23/2023 03:04 PM] |
Filing 24
ORDER FILED. Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Answering Brief for 30 days (DE 23) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Answering Brief Due 11/30/2023. 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: 09/25/2023 01:57 PM]
|
| Filing 23 Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Answering Brief for 30 days filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 09/25/2023 01:27 PM] |
|
Filing 22
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: 09/18/2023 03:02 PM]
|
| Filing 21 STATEMENT OF NON-OPPOSITION to (DE 18) filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 09/15/2023 12:45 PM] |
|
Filing 20
ORDER FILED. Opening Brief submitted at DE 17 by Petitioner Hector Acosta-Ochoa 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: 09/05/2023 10:28 AM]
|
| Filing 19 Motion to Stay Removal filed at DE 18; Respondent Response to Stay Motion (Filed after PFR) due 9/22/2023. [Entered: 09/01/2023 04:35 PM] |
| Filing 18 MOTION to Stay Removal filed by Petitioner Hector Acosta-Ochoa. REMOVAL STAYED pending further order of the court per General Order 6.4(c). [Entered: 09/01/2023 03:55 PM] |
| Filing 17 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Petitioner Hector Acosta-Ochoa. [Entered: 09/01/2023 03:22 PM] |
|
Filing 16
ORDER FILED. Petitioners unopposed motion (Docket Entry No. 15) for an extension of time to file the opening brief is granted. The opening brief is due September 1, 2023. The answering brief is due October 31, 2023. The optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. Due to the length of prior extensions, no further motions for an extension of time to file the opening brief will be granted absent extraordinary and compelling circumstances. [Entered: 06/21/2023 12:06 PM]
|
| Filing 15 MOTION to extend time to file opening brief filed by Petitioner Hector Acosta-Ochoa. [Entered: 06/05/2023 04:16 PM] |
|
Filing 14
ORDER FILED. Petitioner's unopposed motion (Docket Entry No. 13) for an extension of time to file the opening brief is granted. The opening brief is due June 5, 2023. The answering brief is due August 4, 2023. The optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [Entered: 04/07/2023 10:27 AM]
|
| Filing 13 MOTION to extend time to file opening brief filed by Petitioner Hector Acosta-Ochoa. [Entered: 04/04/2023 06:56 PM] |
|
Filing 12
ORDER FILED. Petitioner's unopposed motion (Docket Entry No. 11) for an extension of time to file the opening brief is granted. The opening brief is due April 5, 2023. The answering brief is due June 5, 2023. The optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [Entered: 03/06/2023 04:06 PM]
|
| Filing 11 MOTION to extend time to file opening brief filed by Petitioner Hector Acosta-Ochoa. [Entered: 03/04/2023 06:28 AM] |
|
Filing 10
ORDER FILED. Petitioner's unopposed motion (Docket Entry No. 9) for an extension of time to file the opening brief is granted. The opening brief is due March 6, 2023. The answering brief is due May 5, 2023. The optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [Entered: 01/04/2023 03:15 PM]
|
| Filing 9 MOTION to extend time to file opening brief filed by Petitioner Hector Acosta-Ochoa. [Entered: 01/03/2023 02:15 PM] |
|
Filing 8
ORDER FILED. Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Opening Brief for 30 days (DE 7) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Immigration Petitioner Opening Brief due 1/5/2023, Immigration Respondent Answering Brief due 3/6/2023. 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: 12/06/2022 04:10 PM]
|
| Filing 7 STREAMLINED request for extension of time to file opening brief for 30 days filed by Petitioner Hector Acosta-Ochoa. [Entered: 12/06/2022 03:36 PM] |
| Filing 6 CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed by DOJ Executive Office Of Immigration Review. [Entered: 09/23/2022 08:24:00 AM] |
| Filing 5 ADDED Counsel for Respondent Jane Tracey Schaffner for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 09/07/2022 12:00:00 PM] |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Jane Tracey Schaffner for Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 09/07/2022 11:45:00 AM] |
| Filing 3 BRIEFING SCHEDULE NOTICE. Certified Administrative Record due 10/7/2022, Immigration Petitioner Opening Brief due 12/6/2022, Immigration Respondent Answering Brief due 2/6/2023. 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. 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: 09/02/2022 10:32:00 AM] |
| 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 9/2/2022. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 22-1464 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: 09/02/2022 10:30:00 AM] |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR REVIEW filed by Petitioner(s). [Entered: 09/02/2022 09:23:00 AM] |
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.
| Search for this case: Acosta-Ochoa 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: HECTOR ACOSTA-OCHOA | |
| Represented By: | Anna M. Hysell |
| 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 | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL | |
| Represented By: | Oil |
| Represented By: | Jane Tracey Schaffner |
| 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 | [ 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.
