Humayun v. Cissna et al
Rashid Humayun |
Kevin Riddle, Matthew Whitaker, Lee Francis Cissna and Kirstjen M. Nielsen |
1:2018cv05684 |
December 12, 2018 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia |
William M Ray |
Other Immigration Actions |
08 U.S.C. ยง 1329 |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on December 26, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 6 Administrative Order Staying Civil Proceedings in Light of Lapse Appropriations. Signed by Chief Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr. on 12/26/18.(aaq) |
Filing 5 Electronic Summons Issued as to Kevin Riddle. (eop) |
Filing 3 Electronic Summons Issued as to Kirstjen M. Nielsen. (eop) |
Filing 2 Electronic Summons Issued as to Lee Francis Cissna. (eop) |
Filing 4 Electronic Summons Issued as to Matthew Whitaker. (eop) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT for Mandamus Relief filed by Rashid Humayun. (Filing fee $ 400.00 receipt number 113E-8325786) (Attachments: #1 Ex -A - LPR Card, #2 Ex -B - USCIS Receipt Notice, #3 Ex -C - Application for Naturalization, #4 Exh -D - Interview Notice, #5 Ex -E - Naturalization Interview Results, #6 Ex -F - Notice to Appear, #7 Ex -G - Requests to USCIS, #8 Ex -H - USCIS Congressinal Liaison Email, #9 Civil Cover Sheet)(eop) Please visit our website at http://www.gand.uscourts.gov/commonly-used-forms to obtain Pretrial Instructions and Pretrial Associated Forms which includes the Consent To Proceed Before U.S. Magistrate form. |
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 Northern 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.