ISAKZHANOV et al v. BLINKEN et al
| TIMUR ISAKZHANOV and IRINA ISAKZHANOVA |
| ANTONY BLINKEN and ELIZABETH D. BERRETT |
| 1:2022cv02472 |
| August 18, 2022 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| John D Bates |
| Immigration: Other Immigration Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 27, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by TIMUR ISAKZHANOV, IRINA ISAKZHANOVA (Morrison, Curtis) |
| Filing 9 Memorandum in opposition to re #6 Motion for TRO filed by ELIZABETH D. BERRETT, ANTONY BLINKEN. (Attachments: #1 Text of Proposed Order, #2 Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit B, #4 Exhibit C)(Carilli, Joseph) |
| Filing 8 NOTICE of Appearance by Kartik Narayan Venguswamy on behalf of ELIZABETH D. BERRETT, ANTONY BLINKEN (Venguswamy, Kartik) |
| Filing 7 ENTERED IN ERROR.....NOTICE of Appearance by Kartik Narayan Venguswamy on behalf of ELIZABETH D. BERRETT, ANTONY BLINKEN (Venguswamy, Kartik) Modified on 9/23/2022 (zjm). |
| Filing 6 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order by TIMUR ISAKZHANOV, IRINA ISAKZHANOVA. (Attachments: #1 Memorandum in Support, #2 Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit B, #4 Exhibit C, #5 Exhibit D, #6 Text of Proposed Order)(Morrison, Curtis) |
| NOTICE OF ERROR regarding #7 Notice of Appearance. The following error(s) need correction: Incorrect court header/case caption/case number. Please refile. (zjm) |
MINUTE ORDER: In light of the similarities between #6 plaintiffs' motion for a temporary restraining order, and the motion for temporary restraining order in Ahmed v. Blinken, 22-cv-1567 (JDB), (ECF No. 11), it is hereby ORDERED that the government shall file a consolidated response in both cases by not later than September 26, 2022; it is further ORDERED that plaintiffs shall file a consolidated reply in further support of their motions in both cases by not later than September 28, 2022 at 2:00 p.m. SO ORDERED. Signed by Judge John D. Bates on 9/23/2022. (lcjdb3)
|
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Matthew J. Troy on behalf of All Defendants (Troy, Matthew) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Joseph F. Carilli, Jr on behalf of All Defendants (Carilli, Joseph) |
| Filing 3 RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed. ELIZABETH D. BERRETT served on 8/23/2022; ANTONY BLINKEN served on 8/23/2022, RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed as to the United States Attorney. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney on 8/23/2022. ( Answer due for ALL FEDERAL DEFENDANTS by 10/22/2022.), RETURN OF SERVICE/AFFIDAVIT of Summons and Complaint Executed on United States Attorney General. Date of Service Upon United States Attorney General 8//2022. (Morrison, Curtis) Modified on 9/12/2022 to correct date parties served(zjm). |
| Filing 2 SUMMONS (4) Issued Electronically as to ELIZABETH D. BERRETT, ANTONY BLINKEN, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (Attachment: #1 Notice and Consent)(znmg) |
| Case Assigned to Judge John D. Bates. (znmg) |
| Filing 1 PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS against ELIZABETH D. BERRETT, ANTONY BLINKEN ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number ADCDC-9453728) filed by TIMUR ISAKZHANOV, IRINA ISAKZHANOVA. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Summons US ATTORNEY, #8 Summons BERRETT, #9 Summons BLINKEN, #10 Summons GARLAND, #11 Civil Cover Sheet)(Morrison, Curtis) |
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.
