Singh v. Garland
| INDERJIT SINGH |
| MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL |
| 23-729 |
| April 21, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 26, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 19
ORDER FILED. Respondent's unopposed motion to remand this matter to the Board of Immigration Appeals (Docket Entry No. 18) is granted. Petitioners removal is stayed pending a Board decision in this matter. As stated in the unopposed motion, the parties shall bear their own fees and costs. This order served on the agency shall act as the mandate of this court. REMANDED. [Entered: 10/26/2023 11:17 AM]
|
| Filing 18 MOTION to Remand filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 10/10/2023 04:13 PM] |
| Filing 17 Paper copies (6) of Opening Brief submitted at DE 12 by Petitioner Inderjit Singh received. [Entered: 09/01/2023 10:59 AM] |
| Filing 16 TERMINATED participation of Counsel for Respondent Shahrzad Baghai representing Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 08/28/2023 07:40 AM] |
| Filing 15 ADDED Counsel for Respondent Madeline Henley for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 08/28/2023 07:39 AM] |
| Filing 14 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Madeline Henley for Respondent Merrick B. Garland replacing Shahrzad Baghai. [Entered: 08/28/2023 06:30 AM] |
|
Filing 13
ORDER FILED. Opening Brief submitted at DE 12 by Petitioner Inderjit Singh 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: 08/24/2023 04:09 PM]
|
| Filing 12 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Petitioner Inderjit Singh. [Entered: 08/24/2023 10:32 AM] |
|
Filing 11
ORDER FILED. Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Opening Brief for 30 days (DE 10) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Opening Brief Due 8/24/2023, Answering Brief Due 10/25/2023. 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: 07/24/2023 12:13 PM]
|
| Filing 10 STREAMLINED request for extension of time to file opening brief for 30 days filed by Petitioner Inderjit Singh. [Entered: 07/24/2023 11:21 AM] |
| Filing 9 ADDED Counsel for Petitioner Emily Simcock for Petitioner Inderjit Singh. [Entered: 06/06/2023 01:43 PM] |
| Filing 8 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Emily Simcock for Petitioner Inderjit Singh. [Entered: 06/06/2023 01:29 PM] |
| Filing 7 CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed by DOJ Executive Office Of Immigration Review. [Entered: 05/05/2023 09:00 AM] |
| Filing 6 ADDED Counsel for Respondent Shahrzad Baghai for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 04/21/2023 08:12 AM] |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Shahrzad Baghai for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 04/21/2023 07:57 AM] |
| Filing 4 BRIEFING SCHEDULE NOTICE. Certified Administrative Record due 5/26/2023, Immigration Petitioner Opening Brief due 7/25/2023, Immigration Respondent Answering Brief due 9/25/2023. 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: 04/21/2023 07:06 AM] |
| 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 4/20/2023. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 23-729 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: 04/21/2023 07:03 AM] |
| Filing 2 AGENCY DECISION on review dated 4/5/2023. [Entered: 04/21/2023 07:03 AM] |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR REVIEW filed by Petitioner(s). [Entered: 04/21/2023 07:03 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: Singh 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: INDERJIT SINGH | |
| Represented By: | Adam Boyd |
| Represented By: | Mrs. Emily Simcock |
| 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: | Madeline Henley |
| Represented By: | Oil |
| Represented By: | Ms. Shahrzad Baghai |
| 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.
