PATEL et al v. JADDOU
| BHARATKUMAR NATHALAL PATEL and DIPITIBEN BHAILALBHAI PATEL |
| UR MENDOZA JADDOU |
| 4:2022cv00137 |
| September 9, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Georgia |
| STEPHEN HYLES |
| CLAY D LAND |
| Other Immigration Actions |
| 08 U.S.C. ยง 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 12, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 This is a text only entry; no document issued.CASE TRANSFERRED TO Macon Pursuant to Local Rule 3.4 (tlf). |
| Filing 3 Summonses issued as to UR MENDOZA JADDOU and the U.S. Attorney. The summons provided for the AUSA was addressed to the Albany office and there was no designation for the "civil process clerk". Additionally, there was no summons provided for the Attorney General (tlf). |
Filing 2
ORDER REFERRING CASE to US MAGISTRATE JUDGE STEPHEN HYLES issued at the direction of the Court (tlf).
|
| Case Transferred Out - Divisional Transfer to Case # 5:22-cv-332 (tlf). |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants Fee paid: Receipt # AGAMDC-4180195, $402 filed by All Plaintiffs (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons Summons Jaddou, #3 Summons Summons Leary, #4 Exhibit A: U visa receipt Bharatkumar, #5 Exhibit B: U visa receipt Diptiben, #6 Exhibit C: processing time report)(DIAZ, LESLIE) |
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 Georgia Middle 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.
