Trejo-Quiroz v. Kolitwenzew et al
Petitioner: Christian Trejo-Quiroz
Respondent: Chad Kolitwenzew, William Barr, Kevin McAleenan and Jose Zamora
Interested Party: United States of America
Case Number: 2:2019cv02174
Filed: June 27, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Central District of Illinois
Presiding Judge: Sue E Myerscough
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on July 9, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
July 9, 2019 Filing 12 JUDGMENT entered. (SKN, ilcd)
July 3, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER: Petitioner Christian Trejo-Quiroz's Petition for Writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. 2241 (Doc. #1 ) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, and Petitioner's Motions (Docs. #2 and #8 ) are DENIED. Petitioner's Motion to Supplement (Doc. #10 ) is GRANTED. THIS CASE IS CLOSED. (SEE WRITTEN ORDER.) Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 7/3/2019. (GL, ilcd)
July 3, 2019 Filing 10 MOTION to Supplement by Petitioner Christian Trejo-Quiroz. Responses due by 7/17/2019 (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exhibit 5: I-246 Application, #2 Exhibit Exhibit 6: ICE Denial, #3 Exhibit 4: Writ from State Court)(Briskman, Jacob)
July 3, 2019 Filing 9 REPLY to Response to Motion re #1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing fee $ 5.), #2 MOTION Order to Show Cause to Issue MOTION for Order to Show Cause filed by Petitioner Christian Trejo-Quiroz. (Briskman, Jacob)
July 3, 2019 Filing 8 MOTION for Reconsideration Denial/Revocation of Stay of Removal by Petitioner Christian Trejo-Quiroz. Responses due by 7/17/2019 (Briskman, Jacob)
July 1, 2019 Filing 7 RESPONSE to Motion re #1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing fee $ 5.) filed by Respondent Chad Kolitwenzew. (Nicholson, Nancy)
July 1, 2019 Filing 6 RESPONSE to Motion re #1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing fee $ 5.) filed by Interested Party United States of America. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B)(Hoelzer, John)
July 1, 2019 Opinion or Order TEXT ORDER: Respondent's Motion to Substitute Attorney #5 is GRANTED. The Clerk is directed to substitute John Hoelzer for Greggory R. Walters as the attorney for the Respondent in this matter. Additionally, per the Court's June 28, 2019 Text Orders, Petitioner's Petition for a Stay of Removal #4 is DENIED. For the reasons stated in the Court's Order #3 , the Clerk is directed to terminate Jose Zamora as Respondent in this matter. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 7/1/2019. (GL, ilcd)
June 28, 2019 Filing 5 MOTION to Substitute Attorney, Greggory R. Walters to be replaced by John D. Hoelzer, by Interested Party United States of America. Responses due by 7/12/2019 (Hoelzer, John)
June 28, 2019 Filing 4 PETITION Stay by Petitioner Christian Trejo-Quiroz. Responses due by 6/28/2019 (Briskman, Jacob)
June 28, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 3 ORDER: The Clerk of the Court shall serve Respondent Chad Kolitwenzew and his statutorily-mandated attorney, Kankakee County State's Attorney Jim Rowe, by certified mail pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b), with a copy of the Petition and this Order. Respondent has three (3) days to respond to the Petition #1 . The United States is named Interested Party in this case. The Clerk of the Court shall serve the United States with a copy of the Petition and this Order. The United States has three (3) days to respond to the Petition #1 . Respondent and the United States are directed to attach those portions of the administrative record that are relevant to Petitioner's claims. Ricardo Wong and William P. Barr, and Kevin McAleenan are terminated from this case. SEE WRITTEN ORDER. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 06/28/2019. (SKN, ilcd)
June 28, 2019 Opinion or Order TEXT ORDER: The Court now sua sponte REVOKES its order for a stay of Petitioner's removal. Upon further review, the Court sees that Petitioner has also filed a Motion for Emergency Stay in his case before the Seventh Circuit, Case 19-2053, which was denied yesterday afternoon. Petitioner raised the same grounds in that Motion has he does in his Petition before this Court. Accordingly, the Court finds that his request for a stay in his removal by this Court is foreclosed by the Seventh Circuit's ruling. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 06/28/2019. (SKN, ilcd)
June 28, 2019 Opinion or Order REVOKED per further Text Order of 6/28/2019 TEXT ORDER: The Court sua sponte ORDERS an emergency stay of the removal of Petitioner until the merits of the Petition can be determined. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 06/28/2019. (SKN, ilcd) Modified on 7/1/2019 (GL, ilcd).
June 28, 2019 Opinion or Order TEXT ORDER: Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. 2241 #1 indicates that he may be removed from the United States today, June 28, 2019. Petitioner's counsel is ordered to immediately notify the Court of the status of his removal and inform this Court of the need for an emergency hearing on a temporary restraining order to stay the order of removal against Petitioner. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 06/28/2019. (SKN, ilcd)
June 27, 2019 Filing 2 MOTION Order to Show Cause to Issue , MOTION for Order to Show Cause by Petitioner Christian Trejo-Quiroz. Responses due by 6/28/2019 (Briskman, Jacob)
June 27, 2019 Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Filing fee $ 5.), filed by Christian Trejo-Quiroz.(Briskman, Jacob) (Additional attachment(s) added on 6/27/2019: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (SKN, ilcd).
June 27, 2019 Filing fee: $5.00 paid, receipt number 24626008787. (DS, ilcd)

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 Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Trejo-Quiroz v. Kolitwenzew et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Chad Kolitwenzew
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: William Barr
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Kevin McAleenan
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent: Jose Zamora
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Christian Trejo-Quiroz
Represented By: Jacob Solomon Briskman
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Interested party: United States of America
Represented By: John David Hoelzer
Represented By: Greggory R Walters
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?