Singh v. Garland et al
| Kuldeep Singh |
| Merrick Garland, Citizenship and Immigration (USCIS), Alejandro Mayorkas, Tracy Renaud and Ur Mendoza Jaddou |
| 2:2022cv01405 |
| March 14, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Gary R Brown |
| Other Immigration Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 31, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 NOTICE of Appearance by Megan Jeanette Freismuth on behalf of All Defendants (aty to be noticed) (Freismuth, Megan) |
| Filing 9 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Kuldeep Singh. Ur Mendoza Jaddou served on 3/21/2022, answer due 5/20/2022. (Tirado, Chelsea) |
| Filing 8 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Kuldeep Singh. Tracy Renaud served on 3/21/2022, answer due 5/20/2022. (Tirado, Chelsea) |
| Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Kuldeep Singh. Merrick Garland served on 3/21/2022, answer due 5/20/2022. (Attachments: #1 Affidavit of Service for Summons Served on Different Address) (Tirado, Chelsea) |
| Filing 6 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Kuldeep Singh. Alejandro Mayorkas served on 3/21/2022, answer due 5/20/2022. (Tirado, Chelsea) |
| Counsel in the above case called the Clerk's Office to inform of an incorrect filing (Summons Returned Executed). They should have been filed as "Summons Returned Executed as to USA. Docket Entries 6-10 have been deleted in their entirety. Counsel is directed to re-file the returned summonses using the correct entry. The original date of the filings is 3/28/2022. (Tirado, Chelsea) |
| Filing 5 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. (Landow, Concetta) |
| Filing 4 Summons Issued as to All Defendants. (Landow, Concetta) |
| Filing 3 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made. (Landow, Concetta) |
| Filing 2 This attorney case opening filing has been checked for quality control. See the attachment for corrections that were made, if any. (Bowens, Priscilla) |
| Case Assigned to Judge Gary R. Brown. 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. (Landow, Concetta) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants Was the Disclosure Statement on Civil Cover Sheet completed -YES,, filed by Kuldeep Singh. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Summons, #2 Civil Cover Sheet) (Landow, Concetta) Modified on 3/15/2022 (Landow, Concetta). |
| FILING FEE: $ 402.00, receipt number ANYEDC-15375072 (Landow, Concetta) Modified on 3/15/2022 (Landow, Concetta). |
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.
