Cruz Angeles, et al. v. Garland
| TOMAS CRUZ ANGELES and MARIA DE JESUS CENTENO URIBE |
| MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL |
| 22-1896 |
| November 18, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 6, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER FILED. Pursuant to respondents unopposed motion (Docket Entry No. 9), the Clerk will close this courts docket for administrative purposes until further order of the court. This order is not a decision on the merits and has no impact on any stay of removal. No mandate will issue, and at any time any party may request that this immigration petition be reopened, or the court may reopen the petition sua sponte. Within 14 days after a determination at the agency level that petitioner is eligible for discretionary relief, the parties are expected to file a motion to remand. The parties may request a referral to mediation at any time it might benefit the case. [Entered: 01/06/2023 09:47 AM]
|
| Filing 9 MOTION to administratively close case filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 12/23/2022 08:46 AM] |
| Filing 8 CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed by DOJ Executive Office Of Immigration Review. [Entered: 12/09/2022 06:27 AM] |
| Filing 7 FEE PAID by Maria Centeno, Receipt #4709005643, money order #0743706052 for $500.00. [Entered: 12/08/2022 02:22 PM] |
|
Filing 6
ORDER FILED. To proceed in this court, petitioners must pay a $500 filing fee or seek in forma pauperis status. If petitioners do not pay the fees or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis within 28 days of this order, the petition may be dismissed for failure to comply. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. The Clerk will serve a Form 4 financial affidavit on petitioners. [Entered: 11/22/2022 04:07 PM]
|
| Filing 5 ADDED Counsel for Respondent Andrea Gevas for Respondent Merrick B. Garland, Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 11/21/2022 01:56 PM] |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Andrea Gevas for Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 11/21/2022 07:10 AM] [Edited: 11/21/2022 10:00 AM] |
| Filing 3 BRIEFING SCHEDULE NOTICE. Certified Administrative Record due 12/23/2022, Immigration Petitioner Opening Brief due 2/21/2023, Immigration Respondent Answering Brief due 4/24/2023. 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: 11/18/2022 01:23 PM] |
| 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 11/18/2022. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 22-1896 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: 11/18/2022 01:21 PM] |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR REVIEW filed by Petitioner(s). [Entered: 11/18/2022 01:20 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.
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.
