In Re Bobby Gordon Onyemeh Sea
| Bobby Gordon Onyemeh Sea |
| 0:2021mc00020 |
| March 9, 2021 |
| US District Court for the District of Minnesota |
| John R Tunheim |
| Other Statutory Actions |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 25, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 2
ORDER granting #1 PETITION for Reinstatement to Practice as to Attorney Bobby Gordon Onyemeh Sea Signed by Chief Judge John R. Tunheim on 3/25/2021. (HMA)
|
| Filing 1 PETITION for Reinstatement to Practice as to Attorney Bobby Gordon Onyemeh Sea (filing fee $49, receipt number AMNDC-0000075). Case assigned to Chief Judge Tunheim per Civil Miscellaneous list. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Cover Letter) (MGV) |
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
| Search for this case: In Re Bobby Gordon Onyemeh Sea | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| In re: Bobby Gordon Onyemeh Sea | |
| Represented By: | Bobby Gordon Onyemeh Sea |
| 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.
