Espinoza Rosa v. Garland
Petitioner: MARTA NOHEMI ESPINOZA ROSA
Respondent: MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Case Number: 24-690
Filed: February 8, 2024
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on February 9, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
February 9, 2024 Opinion or Order Filing 8 ORDER FILED. Lisa B. Fitzgerald, Appellate Commissioner. The motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket Entry No. 6) is granted. The Clerk will amend the docket to reflect this status. The certified administrative record remains due March 19, 2024. The briefing schedule set at case opening remains in effect. [Entered: 02/09/2024 03:41 PM]
February 8, 2024 Filing 7 ADDED Counsel for Respondent Enitan Otunla [Entered: 02/08/2024 11:18 AM]
February 8, 2024 Filing 6 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis filed by Petitioner Marta Nohemi Espinoza Rosa. [Entered: 02/08/2024 10:28 AM]
February 8, 2024 Filing 5 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Enitan Otunla for Respondent Merrick B. Garland. [Entered: 02/08/2024 10:19 AM]
February 8, 2024 Filing 4 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Certified Administrative Record due (Respondent) 3/19/2024, Immigration Petitioner Opening Brief due (Petitioner) 4/29/2024, Immigration Respondent Answering Brief due (Respondent) 5/28/2024. 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: 02/08/2024 09:35 AM]
February 8, 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 2/8/2024. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 24-690 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: 02/08/2024 09:33 AM]
February 8, 2024 Filing 2 AGENCY DECISION on review dated 1/18/2024. [Entered: 02/08/2024 09:31 AM]
February 8, 2024 Filing 1 PETITION FOR REVIEW filed by Petitioner Marta Nohemi Espinoza Rosa. [Entered: 02/08/2024 09:31 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: Espinoza Rosa 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: MARTA NOHEMI ESPINOZA ROSA
Represented By: Mr. Mario Acosta
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: Ms. Enitan Otunla
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?