Omofuegbe v. Jaddou et al
| Matthew Akhere Omofuegbe |
| Ur Mendoza Jaddou and Alejandro Mayorkas |
| 3:2022cv00196 |
| June 3, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Western District of Texas |
| David Briones |
| Naturalization Application |
| 8 U.S.C. ยง 1446 Petition for Naturalization Hearing |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 12, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Matthew Akhere Omofuegbe. Ur Mendoza Jaddou served on 6/27/2022, answer due 8/26/2022; Alejandro Mayorkas served on 6/27/2022, answer due 8/26/2022. (Goldstein, Joshua) |
| Filing 3 Summons Issued as to Ur Mendoza Jaddou, Alejandro Mayorkas, U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General (lc3) |
| If ordered by the court, all referrals will be assigned to Magistrate Judge CASTANEDA (lc3) |
| Case assigned to Judge David Briones. CM WILL NOW REFLECT THE JUDGE INITIALS AS PART OF THE CASE NUMBER. PLEASE APPEND THESE JUDGE INITIALS TO THE CASE NUMBER ON EACH DOCUMENT THAT YOU FILE IN THIS CASE. (lc3) |
| Filing 2 REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS by Matthew Akhere Omofuegbe. (Goldstein, Joshua) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT (Filing fee $ 402.), filed by Matthew Akhere Omofuegbe. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Goldstein, Joshua) (Main Document 1 replaced on 6/6/2022) (lc3). (Attachment 1 replaced on 6/6/2022) (lc3). |
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 Texas Western 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.
