Borges De Almeida, et al. v. Garland
Petitioner: MARCOS AURELIO BORGES DE ALMEIDA, HELEN DAHER DA SILVA and ENZO DAHER DE ALMEIDA
Respondent: MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Case Number: 24-1060
Filed: February 28, 2024
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on February 28, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
February 28, 2024 Filing 4 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Certified Administrative Record due (Respondent) 4/8/2024, Immigration Petitioner Opening Brief due (Petitioner) 5/20/2024, Immigration Respondent Answering Brief due (Respondent) 6/17/2024. 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: 02/28/2024 11:51 AM]
February 28, 2024 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 2/28/2024. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 24-1060 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: 02/28/2024 11:46 AM]
February 28, 2024 Filing 2 AGENCY DECISION on review dated 1/30/2024. [Entered: 02/28/2024 11:44 AM]
February 28, 2024 Filing 1 PETITION FOR REVIEW filed by Petitioner Enzo Daher De Almeida, Petitioner Helen Daher Da Silva, Petitioner Marcos Aurelio Borges De Almeida. [Entered: 02/28/2024 11:44 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: Borges De Almeida, et al. 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: MARCOS AURELIO BORGES DE ALMEIDA
Represented By: Jose F. Vergara
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 ]
Petitioner: HELEN DAHER DA SILVA
Represented By: Jose F. Vergara
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 ]
Petitioner: ENZO DAHER DE ALMEIDA
Represented By: Jose F. Vergara
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
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.


Why Is My Information Online?