Gonzalez Morales v. Garland
| JORGE GONZALEZ MORALES |
| MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL |
| 23-1942 |
| August 23, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 2, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
ORDER FILED. Petitioner's unopposed motion (Docket Entry No. 8) for an extension of time to file the opening brief is granted. The opening brief is due March 26, 2024. The answering brief is due May 28, 2024. The optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [Entered: 11/02/2023 04:52 PM]
|
| Filing 8 MOTION to Extend Time to File Opening Brief filed by Petitioner Jorge Gonzalez Morales. [Entered: 11/01/2023 03:24 PM] |
| Filing 7 CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed by DOJ Executive Office Of Immigration Review. [Entered: 09/25/2023 08:39 AM] |
| Filing 6 ADDED Counsel for Respondent Virginia Lum [Entered: 09/08/2023 11:45 AM] |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Virginia Lum for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 09/08/2023 11:35 AM] |
| Filing 4 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Certified Administrative Record due 9/27/2023, Immigration Petitioner Opening Brief due 11/27/2023, Immigration Respondent Answering Brief due 1/25/2024. All briefs shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 31 and 9th Cir. R. 31-2.1. Failure of the petitioner(s)/appellant(s) to comply with this briefing schedule will result in automatic dismissal of the appeal. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1 [Entered: 08/23/2023 03:15 PM] |
| Filing 3 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 8/23/2023. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 23-1942 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: 08/23/2023 03:13 PM] |
| Filing 2 AGENCY DECISION on review dated 8/7/2023. [Entered: 08/23/2023 03:13 PM] |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR REVIEW filed by Petitioner(s). [Entered: 08/23/2023 03:13 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: Gonzalez Morales 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: JORGE GONZALEZ MORALES | |
| Represented By: | Mr. Christopher John Stender |
| 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: | Ms. Virginia Lum |
| 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.
