Ratul v. United States Department of State et al
Plaintiff: Mahruf Rashid Ratul
Defendant: United States Department of State, U.S. Embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh, Antony Blinken and Peter Haas
Case Number: 1:2023cv01142
Filed: April 28, 2023
Court: US District Court for the District of Maryland
Presiding Judge: George Levi Russell
Nature of Suit: Other Immigration Actions
Cause of Action: 08 U.S.C. ยง 1329 Immigration: Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petition
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 30, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 30, 2023 Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Vickie LeDuc on behalf of Antony Blinken, Peter Haas, U.S. Embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh, United States Department of State (LeDuc, Vickie)
May 10, 2023 Filing 3 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Mahruf Rashid Ratul. Antony Blinken served on 5/8/2023, answer due 7/7/2023; Peter Haas served on 5/8/2023, answer due 7/7/2023; U.S. Embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh served on 5/8/2023, answer due 7/7/2023; United States Department of State served on 5/8/2023, answer due 7/7/2023. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit USPS Receipts)(Hacking, James)
April 28, 2023 Filing 2 Summons Issued 60 days as to Antony Blinken, Peter Haas, U.S. Embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh, United States Department of State, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (ols, Deputy Clerk)
April 28, 2023 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Antony Blinken, Peter Haas, U.S. Embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh, United States Department of State ( Filing fee $ 402 receipt number AMDDC-10569950.), filed by MAHRUF RASHID RATUL. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Summons DOS, #3 Summons Embassy, #4 Summons SOS, #5 Summons Ambassador, #6 Summons US Att., #7 Summons Att. Gral.)(Hacking, James)

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 Maryland District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Ratul v. United States Department of State et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Mahruf Rashid Ratul
Represented By: James Oliver Hacking, III
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 ]
Defendant: United States Department of State
Represented By: Vickie LeDuc
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 ]
Defendant: U.S. Embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh
Represented By: Vickie LeDuc
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 ]
Defendant: Antony Blinken
Represented By: Vickie LeDuc
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 ]
Defendant: Peter Haas
Represented By: Vickie LeDuc
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?