Michel v. Sessions et al
| Danny Alison Michel |
| Thomas Decker, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Jefferson Sessions, III and Kirstjen Nielsen |
| 1:2018cv04873 |
| August 28, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Kiyo A Matsumoto |
| Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee |
| 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 1, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
JUDGMENT, that this action is dismissed without prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs, expenses, and fees; that Petitioner will post a bond in the amount of $5,000.00 on or before October 1,2018; that Petitioner will be subject to a Release on his Own Recognizance (ROR) that will be remain in effect throughout the entirety of his current proceedings in which the Petitioner challenges his removal from the United States before the Immigration Judge, or any appeal of the decision of the Immigration Judge to the Board of Immigration Appeals and the appropriate Federal Court of Appeals including the United States Supreme Court that for the avoidance of doubt, the ROR may be revoked in accordance with its terms in the event of a change in the Petitioner's circumstances, including, but not limited to, the Petitioner violating the reporting requirements of the ROR or violating any local, State, or Federal laws or ordinances; that in the event that the Respondents fail to comply with paragraph 3 of the stipulation, the Petitioner will have the right to seek immediate relief from this Court; and that in the event that the Petitioner receives a final administrative order of removal after the conclusion of the current proceedings before the Immigration Judge, or any appeal of the decision of the immigration Judge to the Board of Immigration Appeals and the appropriate Federal Court of Appeals including the United States Supreme Court, the Respondents shall provide for an orderly departure that includes notice of the date and time of Respondents' request for the Petitioner to surrender and such surrender shall not be less than 15 days from the date of the notice. (Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 10/1/2018) c/m (Galeano, Sonia)
|
|
Filing 8
ORDER DISMISSING CASE, This action shall be dismissed without prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs, expenses, and fees. The Petitioner will post a bond in the amount of $5,000.00 on or before October 1, 2018. The Petitioner will be subject to a Release on his Own Recognizance (ROR) that will be remain in effect throughout the entirety of his current proceedings in which thePetitioner challenges his removal from the United States before the Immigration Judge, or any appeal of the decision of the Immigration Judge to the Board of Immigration Appeals and the appropriate Federal Court of Appeals including the United States Supreme Court. For the avoidance of doubt, the ROR may be revoked in accordance with its terms in the event of a change in the Petitioner's circumstances, including, but not limited to, the Petitioner violating the reporting requirements of the ROR or violating any local, State, orFederal laws or ordinances. In the event that the Respondents fail to comply with paragraph 3 of this stipulation, the Petitioner will have the right to seek immediate relief from this Court. In the event that the Petitioner receives a final administrative order of removal after the conclusion of the current proceedings before the Immigration Judge, or any appeal of the decision of the Immigration Judge to the Board of Immigration Appeals and the appropriate Federal Court of Appeals including the United States Supreme Court, the Respondents shall provide for an orderly departure that includes notice of the date and time of Respondents' request for the Petitioner to surrender and such surrender shall not be less than 15 days from the date of the notice. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly. (Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 9/27/2018) C/M Fwd. for Judgment. (Galeano, Sonia)
|
| Filing 7 STIPULATION of Dismissal without prejudice for the Court's endorsement by Thomas Decker, Kirstjen Nielsen, Jefferson Sessions, III, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Weinberg, Alex) |
| Filing 5 Consent MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to #3 Order to Show Cause (Federal), by Thomas Decker, Kirstjen Nielsen, Jefferson Sessions, III, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (Weinberg, Alex) |
|
ORDER granting #5 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply. Respondents' consented-to request for an extension of time is granted. The court hereby ORDERS: (1) respondents shall file their response to the Order to Show Cause on or before October 29, 2018; (2) petitioner shall file his reply thereto on or before November 19, 2018; and (3) the parties shall appear before Hon. Kiyo A. Matsumoto regarding petitioner's motion at 10 AM on December 11, 2018 in Courtroom 6C South. Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 8/30/2018. (Renzler, Katie)
|
| Filing 6 MEMORANDUM in Support re #1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Danny Alison Michel. (Williams-Jackson, Sandra) |
| Filing 4 NOTICE of Appearance by Alex Scott Weinberg on behalf of All Defendants (notification declined or already on case) (Weinberg, Alex) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE and Electronic Service upon the US Attorneys Office. Court issue an Order to Show Cause against the Respondents filed by Danny Alison Michel Show Cause Hearing set for 9/7/2018 02:00 PM before Judge Margo K. Brodie. Show Cause Response due by 9/4/2018.Ordered by Judge Margo K. Brodie on 8/27/2018. (Bowens, Priscilla) Modified on 9/19/2018 (Williams-Jackson, Sandra).
|
| Filing 2 MOTION to Compel Respondents to Comply with Court Order. (Bowens, Priscilla) (Main Document 2 replaced on 9/19/2018) (Williams-Jackson, Sandra). Modified on 9/19/2018 (Williams-Jackson, Sandra). |
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus , filed by Danny Alison Michel. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (Bowens, Priscilla) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/19/2018: #2 Exh. 1, #3 Exh. 2, #4 Exh. 3, #5 Exh. 4, #6 Exh. 5, #7 Exh. 6, #8 Exh.7, #9 Exh. 8, #10 Exh. 9, #11 Exh. 10, #12 Exh. 11, #13 Exh. 12, #14 Exh. 13, #15 Exh. 14, #16 Exh. 15) (Bowens, Priscilla). |
|
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: Oral argument is scheduled for August 30, 2018 @ 4:00PM to discuss petitioner's motion #2 to compel. The petitioner shall serve a copy of their petition and motion upon the respondent's by no later then 5pm on August 28, 2018 and file proof of service. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 8/28/2018. (Innelli, Michael)
|
|
ORDER REASSIGNING CASE. Case reassigned to Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto for all further proceedings. Judge Frederic Block no longer assigned to case Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned Judges, located on our #website. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Ordered by Chief Judge Dora Lizette Irizarry on 8/28/2018. (Bowens, Priscilla)
|
| FILING FEE: $ 5, receipt number 4653131647 (Bowens, Priscilla) |
|
ELECTRONIC ORDER: The order to show cause and oral argument scheduled for August 30, 2018 @ 4pm before J. Block is canceled and this case will be randomly re-assigned to a new judge to hear the matter on September 7, 2018 @ 2:00PM. Ordered by Judge Frederic Block on 8/28/2018. (Innelli, Michael)
|
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 New York Eastern 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.
