Al-Rifahe et al v. Mayorkas et al
Plaintiff:
Nassir Al-Rifahe and Delphine Bonghan
Defendant:
Alejandro Mayorkas, Janet Napolitano and Robert Mueller
Case Number:
0:2010cv01971
Filed:
May 5, 2010
Court:
Minnesota District Court
Office:
DMN Office
County:
Hennepin
Presiding Judge:
John R. Tunheim
Nature of Suit:
Other Immigration Actions
Cause of Action:
05:702
Jury Demanded By:
None
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Date Filed | # | Document Text |
|---|---|---|
| March 7, 2011 | 29 |
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part defendants' 5 Motion to Dismiss or, in the alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment as follows: The motion is granted with regard to claims against defendant Robert Mueller, who is dismissed from this action. The motion is denied in all other regards. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge John R. Tunheim on March 7, 2011. (DML)
|
| October 8, 2010 | 26 |
ORDER re 25 Stipulation filed by Nassir Al-Rifahe, Alejandro Mayorkas, Robert Mueller, Janet Napolitano, Delphine Bonghan. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the stipulation is GRANTED and pursuant to the stipulation, plaintiff Delphine Bonghan's claim in this matter be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Each of the parties shall bear their own costs and fees.(Written Opinion). Signed by Judge John R. Tunheim on October 8, 2010. (HAM)
|
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 Minnesota 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.
