ARSHAD v. U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY et al
| NASIR ARSHAD |
| U.S. CITIZENSHIP & IMMIGRATION SERVICES, KAY LEOPOLD, KENNETH T CUCCINELLI, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, KEVIN K. MCALEENAN, KENNETH CUCCINELLI and KEVIN MCALEENAN |
| 1:2019cv02819 |
| September 19, 2019 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| Richard J Leon |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 8 U.S.C. ยง 1101 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 30, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 SUMMONS (1) Issued Electronically as to U.S. CITIZENSHIP & IMMIGRATION SERVICES. (jf) |
| Filing 3 REQUEST FOR SUMMONS TO ISSUE as to Defendant USCIS filed by NASIR ARSHAD.(Hacking, James) |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS (6) Issued Electronically as to KENNETH CUCCINELLI, KAY LEOPOLD, KEVIN MCALEENAN, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (Attachment: #1 Notice and Consent)(zeg) |
| SUMMONS Not Issued as to U.S. CITIZENSHIP & IMMIGRATION SERVICES (zeg) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Richard J. Leon. (zeg) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0090-6388383) filed by NASIR ARSHAD. (Attachments: #1 Summons, #2 Summons, #3 Summons, #4 Summons, #5 Summons, #6 Summons, #7 Civil Cover Sheet)(Hacking, James) (Attachment 7 replaced on 9/20/2019) (zeg). |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the District Of Columbia District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
