Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
Searching dockets in Law Office Of Derrick J Hensley x
Alert me of new activity
All Case Activity Alerts Include: Answers, Appeals, Complaints, Motions, Orders, Trial Notes
Immigration: Other Immigration Actions | District Of Columbia
.Order
MINUTE ORDER granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, ECF No. 22 . On August 25, 2026, the court granted Defendants' Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint Nunc Pro Tunc, ECF No. 24 , and accepted for filing their Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff has not filed a timely response. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12; see also LCvR 7(b) (setting 14 days as the deadline for an opposition to a motion). The court agrees that this matter must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(9), as explained in the court's Memorandum Opinion and Order entered on June 29, 2016, ECF No. 19 . Accordingly, Defendants' motion to dismiss is granted. This is a final, appealable order. Signed by Judge Amit P. Mehta on 9/9/2026. (lcapm1)
Order on Motion for Entry of Default Order on Motion for Extension of Time to
MINUTE ORDER denying Plaintiff's 20 Motion for Entry of Default, and granting Defendants' 21 Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Complaint Nunc Pro Tunc. Entry of default is denied as Plaintiff has not "establishe[d] a claim or right to relief," as required for entry of a default judgment against the United States under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(d). Although Plaintiff seeks only entry of default, and not a default judgment, it would be futile to enter default when Plaintiff has not shown a substantial likelihood that the court has jurisdiction to hear her claim. See 19 Mem. Op. and Order. As for Defendants' request to late file, that request is granted. Defendants have established excusable neglect based on counsel's medical emergency, the delay in responding to the complaint has not been long, the reason for the delay (the health emergency) was partially outside of counsel's control, and the absence of prejudice to Plaintiff who failed to establish the court's jurisdiction at the preliminary injunction stage. See Pioneer Inv. Servs. Co. v. Brunswick Assocs. Ltd. P'ship, 507 U.S. 380, 395 (1993). Signed by Judge Amit P. Mehta on 8/25/2026. (lcapm1)
In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.
TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS
Already a subscriber? Click here to login
Email (NOTE: Free email domains not supported)
First Name
Last Name
Job Title
PLEASE NOTE: A verification email will be sent to your address before you can access your trial.
Password (at least 8 characters required)
Confirm Password
Law360 may contact you in your professional capacity with information about our other products, services and events that we believe may be of interest.You’ll be able to update your communication preferences via the unsubscribe link provided within our communications.We take your privacy seriously. Please see our Privacy Policy.