Campbell v. Garland
| HARRINGTON COURTNEY CAMPBELL |
| MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL |
| 23-933 |
| May 16, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 24, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 15 MANDATE ISSUED Barry G. SILVERMAN, Ryan D. NELSON, Patrick J. BUMATAY [Entered: 10/24/2023 09:16 AM] |
Filing 14
ORDER FILED. Barry G. SILVERMAN, Ryan D. NELSON, Patrick J. BUMATAY Petitioners filing (Docket Entry No. 13), treated as a motion for reconsideration of the courts order dismissing this petition for review, is denied. See 9th Cir. R. 27-10 [Entered: 10/16/2023 12:10 PM]
|
| Filing 13 Filed Petitioner Harrington Campbell petition for review with motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Deficiency: Case closed. [Entered: 07/11/2023 03:33 PM] |
|
Filing 12
ORDER FILED. Barry G. SILVERMAN, Ryan D. NELSON, Patrick J. BUMATAY This petition for review was improperly filed in the Ninth Circuit, because the immigration judge completed proceedings in the Eleventh Circuit. See 8 U.S.C. 1252(b)(2) (The petition for review shall be filed with the court of appeals for the judicial circuit in which the immigration judge completed the proceedings.). We decline to transfer the petition to the Eleventh Circuit. See Bibiano v. Lynch, 834 F.3d 966, 973-74 (9th Cir. 2016). To the extent petitioner seeks review of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) April 7, 2023, order, the petition is untimely. See 8 U.S.C. 1252(b)(1). To the extent petitioner seeks review of the BIAs May 5, 2023, filing receipt, this is not a final order of removal that we have jurisdiction to review. See 8 U.S.C. 1252(a)(1). The motion to dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction (Docket Entry No. 7) is granted. The motion for a stay of removal is denied. The temporary stay of removal is lifted. All other pending motions are denied as moot. PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED. [Entered: 06/27/2023 04:53 PM]
|
| Filing 11 CERTIFIED ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD filed by DOJ Executive Office Of Immigration Review. [Entered: 06/16/2023 08:04 AM] |
|
Filing 10
ORDER FILED. Petitioner included in his petition for review a motion for a stay of removal which has now been docketed as Docket Entry No. 9. The governments motion to dismiss is treated in part as an opposition to the motion for a stay of removal. The motion to dismiss remains pending and will be addressed by separate order. [Entered: 06/14/2023 03:08 PM]
|
| Filing 8 RESPONSE to Motion to Dismiss (DE 7) filed by Petitioner Harrington Courtney Campbell. [Entered: 06/14/2023 10:06 AM] |
| Filing 7 MOTION to dismiss case filed by Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 05/26/2023 04:23 AM] |
| Filing 6 ADDED Counsel for Respondent Alanna Thanh Duong for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 05/17/2023 10:45 AM] |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Alanna Thanh Duong for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 05/17/2023 04:15 AM] |
| Filing 9 MOTION TO STAY REMOVAL filed by Petitioner(s); REMOVAL STAYED pending further order of the court per General Order 6.4(c). [Entered: 06/14/2023 01:18 PM] |
| Filing 4 BRIEFING SCHEDULE NOTICE. Certified Administrative Record due 6/20/2023, Immigration Petitioner Opening Brief due 8/21/2023, Immigration Respondent Answering Brief due 10/18/2023. 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: 05/16/2023 01:44 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 5/16/2023. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 23-933 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: 05/16/2023 01:42 PM] |
| Filing 2 MOTION to proceed in forma pauperis filed by Petitioner(s). [Entered: 05/16/2023 01:40 PM] |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR REVIEW filed by Petitioner(s). [Entered: 05/16/2023 01:40 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: Campbell 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: HARRINGTON COURTNEY CAMPBELL | |
| Represented By: | Harrington Courtney Campbell |
| 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. Alanna Thanh Duong |
| 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.
