Semedo v. Hodgson
Petitioner: Amadeu Mendes Semedo
Respondent: Thomas M. Hodgson
Case Number: 1:2019cv12067
Filed: October 4, 2019
Court: US District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Presiding Judge: Nathaniel M Gorton
Nature of Suit: Deportation
Cause of Action: 28:2241
Jury Demanded By: None
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on November 6, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
November 6, 2019 Filing 9 Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton: ORDER entered. ORDER DISMISSING CASE(Lima, Christine)
November 4, 2019 Filing 8 Mail Returned as Undeliverable. Mail sent to Amadeu Mendes Semedo. (Vieira, Leonardo)
October 31, 2019 Filing 7 RESPONSE TO COURT ORDER by Thomas M. Hodgson re #1 Petition for Write of Habeas Corpus (2241) and Notice of Release of Petitioner from Detention. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit ICE affidavit)(Balakrishna, Annapurna) Modified on 11/6/2019 (Lima, Christine).
October 25, 2019 Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Annapurna Balakrishna on behalf of Thomas M. Hodgson (Balakrishna, Annapurna)
October 9, 2019 Filing 5 Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton: ORDER of SERVICE entered granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. The clerk shall serve a copy of the petition upon Sheriff Hodgson and the United States Attorney for the District of Massachusetts. Respondent Thomas M. Hodgson shall respond to the petition within 21 days of the entry of this order. In order to give the Court time to consider the matter, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the petitioner shall not be moved outside the District of Massachusetts without providing the Court 48 hours' advance notice of the move and the reason therefor. Any such 48-hour notice period shall commence at the date and time such notice is filed and expire 48 hours later, except "[i]f the period would end on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the same time on the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday." Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(2)(C). (PSSA, 4)
October 4, 2019 Filing 4 Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton: ORDER entered. STANDING ORDER on 2241 petitions regarding detention and removal of the Petitioner from the District of Massachusetts. re #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) filed by Amadeu Mendes Semedo (Danieli, Chris)
October 4, 2019 Filing 3 ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton assigned to case. If the trial Judge issues an Order of Reference of any matter in this case to a Magistrate Judge, the matter will be transmitted to Magistrate Judge M. Page Kelley. (Danieli, Chris)
October 3, 2019 Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Amadeu Mendes Semedo.(Castilla, Francis)
October 2, 2019 Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241), filed by Amadeu Mendes Semedo.(Castilla, Francis)

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

Search for this case: Semedo v. Hodgson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: Amadeu Mendes Semedo
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: Thomas M. Hodgson
Represented By: Annapurna Balakrishna
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?