Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

Date: 05-11-2023

Case Style:

Rohit Mukherjee and Shuvra Mohinta v. United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, et al.

Case Number: 2:23-cv-00098

Judge: Nicholas A Danella

Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama (Jefferson County)

Plaintiff's Attorney:




Click Here For The Best Birmingham Immigration Lawyer Directory





Defendant's Attorney: James Oliver Hacking, III

Description: Birmingham, Alabama immigration lawyers represented Plaintiff seeking a writ of mandamus.

A writ of mandamus is a court order that commands a public official or organization to take a specific action. It is an extraordinary remedy, which means that it is only available in limited circumstances.

To obtain a writ of mandamus, the petitioner must show that the official or organization has a clear legal duty to take the action that is being requested. The petitioner must also show that there is no other way to get the official or organization to take the action.

Writs of mandamus are often used to compel government agencies to comply with the law. For example, a person might file a writ of mandamus to compel a government agency to issue a permit, to provide a hearing, or to release records.

Writs of mandamus can also be used to compel private organizations to comply with the law. For example, a person might file a writ of mandamus to compel a private school to admit a student, to provide a hearing, or to release records.

If you believe that a public official or organization is not complying with the law, you may be able to obtain a writ of mandamus to compel them to take the action that is required. However, it is important to speak with an experienced attorney to determine if a writ of mandamus is the right legal remedy for your situation.

Outcome: MINUTE ENTRY OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSALPursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1), Plaintiffs Rohit Mukherjee and Shuvra Mohinta have voluntarily dismissed this action WITH PREJUDICE. (Doc. 7). Per the notice of dismissal, each side shall bear their own fees and costs. This case is CLOSED. (JLC) (Entered: 05/11/2023)

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments:



Find a Lawyer

Subject:
City:
State:
 

Find a Case

Subject:
County:
State: