Lopez-Lopez v. Garland
| MIGUEL ANGEL LOPEZ-LOPEZ |
| MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL |
| 22-844 |
| May 9, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 19, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 25 MEMORANDUM DISPOSITION (Carlos T. BEA, Morgan B. CHRISTEN, Anthony D. JOHNSTONE) PETITION DENIED. FILED AND ENTERED JUDGMENT. [Entered: 10/19/2023 09:18 AM] |
| Filing 24 SUBMITTED ON THE BRIEFS to Carlos T. BEA, Morgan B. CHRISTEN, Anthony D. JOHNSTONE. [Entered: 10/16/2023 07:44 AM] |
Filing 23
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. The parties joint motion to submit (Dkt. 22) is GRANTED and this case shall be submitted on the briefs and record, without oral argument, on October 16, 2023, in San Francisco, California. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). [Entered: 09/06/2023 11:33 AM]
|
| Filing 22 MOTION to Submit Case on Briefs Without Oral Argument filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 08/09/2023 09:38 AM] |
| Filing 21 NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT on Monday, October 16, 2023 - 09:00 A.M. - Courtroom 3 - Scheduled Location: San Francisco CA 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. [22-844] [Entered: 08/06/2023 06:22 AM] |
| Filing 20 NOTICE: This case is being considered for an upcoming oral argument calendar in San Francisco. Please review the San Francisco sitting dates for October 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. [22-844] [Entered: 06/22/2023 01:21 PM] |
| Filing 19 NOTICE: This case is being considered for an upcoming oral argument calendar in San Francisco. Please review the San Francisco sitting dates for September 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. [22-844] [Entered: 06/07/2023 12:22 PM] |
| Filing 18 Paper copies (6) of Answering Brief submitted at DE 16 by Respondent Merrick B. Garland received. [Entered: 10/11/2022 02:59 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: 10/05/2022 03:28:00 PM]
|
| Filing 16 ANSWERING BRIEF submitted for filing by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 10/05/2022 12:08:00 PM] |
| Filing 15 ADDED Counsel for Respondent Katie Elizabeth Rourke for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 08/17/2022 01:39:00 PM] |
| Filing 14 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Katie Elizabeth Rourke for Merrick B. Garland replacing OIL. [Entered: 08/17/2022 01:31:00 PM] |
| Filing 13 Paper copies (6) of Opening Brief submitted at DE 11 by Petitioner Miguel Angel Lopez-Lopez received. [Entered: 08/01/2022 11:32:46 AM] |
|
Filing 12
ORDER FILED. Opening Brief submitted at DE 11 by Petitioner Miguel Angel Lopez-Lopez 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: 07/27/2022 01:58:00 PM]
|
| Filing 11 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Petitioner Miguel Angel Lopez-Lopez. [Entered: 07/27/2022 12:05:00 PM]--[COURT UPDATE: Removed duplicate PDFs] [Edited: 07/27/2022 01:56:00 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: 07/05/2022 04:03:00 PM]
|
| Filing 9 STATEMENT OF NON-OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO STAY REMOVAL filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 07/05/2022 12:32:00 PM] |
| Filing 8 CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed. [Entered: 06/14/2022 05:56:00 AM] |
| Filing 7 ADDED Aaron Nelson for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 05/09/2022 01:49:00 PM] |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Aaron Nelson for Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 05/09/2022 12:24:00 PM] |
| Filing 5 BRIEFING SCHEDULE NOTICE. Certified Administrative Record due 6/13/2022, Respondent Response to Stay Motion (Filed with PFR) due 7/5/2022, Petitioner Opening Brief due 8/12/2022, Respondent Answering Brief due 10/11/2022. 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: 05/09/2022 10:43:00 AM] |
| 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 5/9/2022. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 22-844 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: 05/09/2022 10:41:00 AM] |
| 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: 05/09/2022 09:56:00 AM] |
| Filing 2 AGENCY DECISION on review dated 4/13/2022. [Entered: 05/09/2022 09:56:00 AM] |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR REVIEW filed by Petitioner(s). [Entered: 05/09/2022 09:53:00 AM] |
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: Lopez-Lopez 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: MIGUEL ANGEL LOPEZ-LOPEZ | |
| Represented By: | Mr. Charles Medina |
| 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: | Oil |
| Represented By: | Mr. Aaron Nelson |
| Represented By: | Katie Elizabeth Rourke |
| 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.
