Soumare v. Secretary, Department of Homeland Security et al
| Niatou Soumare |
| Alejandro Mayorkas, Merrick Garland, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security and United States Attorney General |
| 1:2021cv00610 |
| September 22, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Stephanie K Bowman |
| Douglas R Cole |
| Other Immigration Actions |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1651 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 28, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 14 NOTICE of Appearance by William Bryan King, II for Defendants Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, United States Attorney General (King, William) |
| Set/Reset Deadlines per doc #13 : United States Attorney General answer due 12/13/2021. (kh) |
| Filing 13 SUMMONS Returned Executed as to USA - Defendant United States Attorney General. United States Attorney General served on 10/12/2021, answer due 12/13/2021. (kh) Modified on 10/19/2021 (kh). |
Filing 12
ORDER denying as moot #2 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis, in light of Plaintiff's payment of the full filing fee. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman on 10/15/2021. (km)
|
| Filing 11 SUMMONS Returned Executed as to Defendant United States Attorney General. United States Attorney General served on 10/5/2021, answer due 10/26/2021. (Wang, Charleston) |
| Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman added. (cmb) |
| Filing 10 CERTIFICATE of Mailing: Certified mailing of Summons and Complaint through the Clerk's Office pursuant to Local Rule 4.2. (Attachments: #1 Certified Mail Receipts) (kh) |
|
Filing 9
ORDER REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Signed by Judge Douglas R. Cole on 10/5/21. (sct)
|
| Filing 8 Summons Issued as to Secretary, Department of Homeland Security, United States Attorney General, and U.S. Attorney (bjc) |
| Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman no longer assigned to case. (cmb) |
| Filing fee: $ 402, receipt number AOHSDC-8527924 - Related Document: #1 Complaint filed by Niatou Soumare.. (Wang, Charleston) |
|
Filing 7
DEFICIENCY ORDER - re #2 Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) Plaintiff shall pay the full filing fee or submit a fully completed application and affidavit to proceed in forma pauperis on the Court's standard form, within 30 days of the date of this Order. This case may not further proceed until the appropriate filing fee is paid or Plaintiff is granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis; (2) If Plaintiff fails to pay the filing fee or to submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis within the time limit specified above, the complaint may be dismissed. Response to Order due by 10/28/2021. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman on 9/28/2021. (km)
|
| Filing 6 REQUEST for Issuance of Summons. to Patel (Wang, Charleston) |
| Filing 5 REQUEST for Issuance of Summons. to Garland (Wang, Charleston) |
| Filing 4 REQUEST for Issuance of Summons. to Mayorkas (Wang, Charleston) |
| Filing 3 NOTICE of Appearance by Charleston Cheng Kung Wang for Plaintiff Niatou Soumare (Wang, Charleston) |
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis by Plaintiff Niatou Soumare. (Wang, Charleston) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT for MANDAMUS & INJUNCTIVE RELIEF against All Defendants, filed by Niatou Soumare. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Civil Cover Sheet) (Wang, Charleston) |
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 Ohio 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
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.
