Khadim v. Risch et al
| Samia Khadim |
| Angela Aggeler, Edward J. Ramotowski and Carl Risch |
| 1:2020cv06170 |
| December 19, 2020 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Margo K Brodie |
| Mandamus & Other |
| 08 U.S.C. ยง 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 21, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Thomas Russell Price on behalf of All Defendants (aty to be noticed) (Price, Thomas) |
Filing 5
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: The United States Attorney, as attorney for defendants, is directed to show cause on or before 2/22/2021, in writing, why a #1 Writ of Mandamus should not be issued, and shall serve a copy of the response on plaintiff, with proof of such service to the Clerk of this Court. On or before 3/22/2021, plaintiff shall file her reply, if any, with proof of service to the Clerk of this Court. Oral argument shall be heard on 4/21/2021 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 6F North before Judge Margo K. Brodie. SO ORDERED by Judge Margo K. Brodie, on 12/21/2020. C/mailed to Plaintiff's counsel. Electronic Service upon the U.S. Attorney's Office, re: this Order to Show Cause and Plaintiff's #1 Complaint / Writ of Mandamus. (Show Cause Hearing set for 4/21/2021 at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 6F North before Judge Margo K. Brodie; Show Cause Response due by 2/22/2021.) (Latka-Mucha, Wieslawa)
|
| Filing 4 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 3 In accordance with Rule 73 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 73.1, the parties are notified that if all parties consent a United States magistrate judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action including a (jury or nonjury) trial and to order the entry of a final judgment. Attached to the Notice is a blank copy of the consent form that should be filled out, signed and filed electronically only if all parties wish to consent. The form may also be accessed at the following link: #http://www.uscourts.gov/uscourts/FormsAndFees/Forms/AO085.pdf. You may withhold your consent without adverse substantive consequences. Do NOT return or file the consent unless all parties have signed the consent. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Incorrect Case/Document/Entry Information. Defendants on the Proposed Summons does not match caption on the complaint. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Margo K. Brodie. 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. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Filing 2 Summons Returned Unexecuted by Samia Khadim as to All Defendants. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Summons Proposed Summons) (Saleem, Mohammad) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants filing fee $ 402, receipt number BNYEDC-13865404 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -YES,, filed by Samia Khadim. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit Exhibit B, #4 Exhibit Exhibit C, #5 Exhibit Exhibit D, #6 Exhibit Exhibit E, #7 Exhibit Exhibit F, #8 Exhibit Exhibit G, #9 Exhibit Exhibit H, #10 Exhibit Exhibit I) (Saleem, Mohammad) |
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.
