Paul Risenhoover v. DOS, et al
| Paul Maas Risenhoover, Dr.; a Potawatomi |
| United States Department of State, United States Department of Homeland Security, United States Customs and Border Protection, CBP Port Director, CNMI, competent authorities and proper Defendants and CBP Port Director, Guam, competent authorities and proper Defendants |
| 23-5231 |
| October 17, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 17, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| INTERNATIONAL MAIL SENT [2022190] with return receipt requested of order [ # 2022186-5 ]. Acknowledgment of Receipt due 11/16/2023 from Paul Maas Risenhoover. [23-5231] [Entered: 10/17/2023 01:53 PM] |
| CLERK'S ORDER [2022186] filed to show cause regarding dismissing case for lack of jurisdiction. Response to Order due 11/16/2023. The response may not exceed the length limitations established in the order. Failure to respond shall result in dismissal of the case for lack of prosecution. The Clerk is directed to send two copies of this order to appellant by air mail and request appellant return one copy of the order with a certification that it has been received. [23-5231] [Entered: 10/17/2023 01:39 PM] |
| NOTICE OF APPEAL [2022183] seeking review of a decision by the U.S. District Court in 1:21-cv-02563-BAH filed by Paul Maas Risenhoover. Appeal assigned USCA Case Number: 23-5231. [23-5231] [Entered: 10/17/2023 01:35 PM] |
| US CIVIL CASE docketed. [23-5231] [Entered: 10/17/2023 01:33 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.
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.
