Uddin v. U.S. Department of State et al
| Mohammed Kashem Uddin |
| U.S. Department of State, U.S. Embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh, Antony Blinken and Peter Haas |
| 1:2024cv03449 |
| May 10, 2024 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Ann M Donnelly |
| Other Immigration Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 10, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (SDM) |
| Filing 4 Summons Issued as to Antony Blinken, Peter Haas, U.S. Department of State, U.S. Embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (SDM) |
| Filing 3 Proposed Summons. Re #1 Complaint, by Mohammed Kashem Uddin (Attachments: #1 Supplement Rider - List of Defendants to Be Served) (Samuel, Michael) |
| Filing 2 Civil Cover Sheet.. Re #1 Complaint, by Mohammed Kashem Uddin (Samuel, Michael) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS against Antony Blinken, Peter Haas, U.S. Department of State, U.S. Embassy in Dhaka, Bangladesh filing fee $ 405, receipt number ANYEDC-17861410 Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -NO,, filed by Mohammed Kashem Uddin. (Samuel, 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.
