Lopez Lopez v. Charles et al
| William P. Barr |
| Briyith E Lopez Lopez |
| Field Officer Marcos Charles, Chad Wolf and Mr. James McHenry |
| 1:2020cv10145 |
| January 23, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Massachusetts |
| Denise J Casper |
| Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2241 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 26, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 Judge Denise J. Casper: ORDER entered. ORDER DISMISSING CASE (McKillop, Matthew) |
| Filing 9 Judge Denise J. Casper: ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER- The Court ALLOWS Defendants motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), D. 6(Hourihan, Lisa) |
| Filing 8 Opposition re #6 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM filed by Briyith E Lopez Lopez. (Rubin, Jeffrey) |
| Filing 7 Judge Denise J. Casper: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. D. #6 : In light of the relief sought in the Petition, D. 1, and the now pending motion to dismiss (both on the grounds of lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim), D. 6, the Court ORDERS that if Petitioner Ms. Lopez opposes the motion to dismiss, she shall file any opposition by Sunday, January 26, 2020 at noon.(McKillop, Matthew) |
| Filing 6 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction , MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM ( Responses due by 2/7/2020) by William P. Barr, Marcos Charles, James McHenry, Chad Wolf. (Attachments: #1 Supplement Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion to Dismisss for Lack of Subject Jurisdiction and Failure to State A Claim, #2 Exhibit Declaration)(Farquhar, Rayford) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE of Appearance by Rayford A. Farquhar on behalf of William P. Barr, Marcos Charles, James McHenry, Chad Wolf (Farquhar, Rayford) |
| Filing 4 Judge Denise J. Casper: ELECTRONIC ORDER entered. In light of the nature of the relief sought by Petitioner, including that she not be compelled to leave the United States by Monday, January 27, 2020, the Court ORDERS as follows. The Clerk shall serve the petition on Respondents and the U.S. Attorney's Office. Counsel for respondents and petitioner shall confer today and file a notice with this Court by 5 p.m. today indicating whether they will agree with the temporary relief that Petitioner seeks in D. 1 at 7, paragraph 18 or some variation of same (seeking a delay in the Petitioner's ordered departure from the U.S.). Once such notice is filed, the Court will determine what, if any, expedited schedule is necessary for Respondents' response to the Petition and any hearing. (Hourihan, Lisa) |
| Filing 3 Modified on 1/24/2020. Given the timing of this matter the Service Order does not apply and was filed in error. (McKillop, Matthew). |
| Filing 2 ELECTRONIC NOTICE of Case Assignment. Judge Denise J. Casper 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 Marianne B. Bowler. (Finn, Mary) |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus (2241) Filing fee: $ 5, receipt number 0101-8069936 Fee status: Filing Fee paid., filed by Briyith E Lopez Lopez. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Exh. A - EOIR FOIA Receipt Confirmation Letter (Oct. 31, 2019), #2 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Category Sheet)(Rubin, Jeffrey) |
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 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.
