No. 18-6357

In Re Rajamani Senthilnathan

Lower Court: N/A
Docketed: 2018-10-17
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: civil-procedure commitment court-authority document-upload due-process electronic-case-filing electronic-filing filing-requirements judicial-jurisdiction jurisdiction legal-filing-procedure pleading pleading-submission standing
Key Terms:
Immigration
Latest Conference: 2019-01-04
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does the court have the authority to consider an ECF (Electronic Case Filing) pleading as having filed when the filing is not fully committed to, with only the pleading uploaded to the website electronically?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED Does the court have the authority to consider an ECF (Electronic Case Filing) : pleading as having filed when the filing is not fully committed to, with only the pleading uploaded to the website electronically ? i

Docket Entries

2019-01-07
Petition DENIED.
2018-12-06
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
2018-11-01
Waiver of right of respondent AT&T, Inc. to respond filed.
2018-10-15
Petition for a writ of mandamus and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 16, 2018)

Attorneys

AT&T, Inc.
Vicki L. GilletteLittler Mendelson P.C., Respondent
Vicki L. GilletteLittler Mendelson P.C., Respondent
Rajamani Senthilnathan
Rajamani Senthilnathan — Petitioner
Rajamani Senthilnathan — Petitioner