Lin v. Cioppa
Ying Qin Lin |
Thomas A. Cioppa |
1:2022cv03883 |
May 12, 2022 |
US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
J Paul Oetken |
Other Immigration Actions |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus |
None |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on May 27, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 5 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Jacqueline Roman on behalf of Thomas A. Cioppa..(Roman, Jacqueline) |
Filing 4 ELECTRONIC SUMMONS ISSUED as to Thomas A. Cioppa. (vf) |
Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (vf) |
Case Designated ECF. (vf) |
CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge J. Paul Oetken. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/district-judges. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Please download and review the ECF Rules and Instructions, located at #https://nysd.uscourts.gov/rules/ecf-related-instructions..(vf) |
***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING CIVIL. CASE OPENING STATISTICAL ERROR CORRECTION: Notice to attorney Nataliya I Gavlin. The following case opening statistical information was erroneously selected/entered: Cause of Action code 05:552(a) Complaint in the Nature of Mandamus; County code New York. The following correction(s) have been made to your case entry: the Cause of Action code has been modified to 28:1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus; the County code has been modified to Kings. (vf) |
***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING PARTY MODIFICATION. Notice to attorney Nataliya I Gavlin. The party information for the following party/parties has been modified: Ying Qin Lin, Thomas A. Cioppa. The information for the party/parties has been modified for the following reason/reasons: party role was entered incorrectly; party text was omitted. (vf) |
Filing 3 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(Gavlin, Nataliya) |
Filing 2 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Thomas A. Cioppa, re: #1 Complaint/Petition in the Nature of Mandamus. Document filed by Ying Qin Lin..(Gavlin, Nataliya) |
Filing 1 FIRST COMPLAINT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS against Thomas A. Cioppa (Filing Fee $ 402.00, Receipt Number ANYSDC-26139458).Document filed by Ying Qin Lin..(Gavlin, Nataliya) |
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 Southern 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: Lin v. Cioppa | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Ying Qin Lin | |
Represented By: | Nataliya I Gavlin |
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 ] |
Defendant: Thomas A. Cioppa | |
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.