Nguyen et al v. Renaud
| Khoa Anh Nguyen and Ha Vo Thi Nguyen Ngo |
| Tracy Renaud |
| 1:2021cv01926 |
| May 7, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia |
| Mark H Cohen |
| Other Immigration Actions |
| 08 U.S.C. ยง 1329 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 11, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 3
STANDING ORDER regarding civil litigation. Signed by Judge Mark H. Cohen on 5/11/21. (jpa)
|
| Filing 2 Electronic Summons Issued as to Tracy Renaud. (rvb) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT for Mandamus Relief filed by Khoa Anh Nguyen, Ha Vo Thi Nguyen Ngo. (Filing fee $ 402 receipt number AGANDC-10958769) (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A Plaintiff's Passport, visa pages, and admission stamps, #2 Exhibit B Principal Plaintiff's Form I-485 Receipt, #3 Exhibit C Additional Plaintiffs' Form I-485 Receipts, #4 Exhibit D Primary Plaintiff's Form I-140 Approval, #5 Exhibit E Employment Authorization Cards, #6 Exhibit F Evidence of Exhaustion, #7 Exhibit G Historical Average Case Processing Times, #8 Exhibit H USCIS.gov Case Processing Times, #9 Exhibit I May 2021 Visa Bulletin, #10 Civil Cover Sheet)(rvb) 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.
