1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. KURAPATI v. UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES
 

KURAPATI v. UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES

Case No. 8:13-cv-68-T-30AEP.

SUNIL KUMAR KURAPATI and BHARATHI MALLIDI, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES, et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division.

June 3, 2015.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Sunil Kumar Kurapati, Plaintiff, represented by Jeffrey A. Devore , Devore Law Group, PA.

Bharathi Mallidi, Plaintiff, represented by Jeffrey A. Devore , Devore Law Group, PA.

United States Citizenship and Immigration Service, Defendant, represented by Aaron S. Goldsmith , US Department of Justice & Aram A. Gavoor , US Department of Justice.

Janet Napolitano, Secretary, United States Department of Homeland Security, Defendant, represented by Aaron S. Goldsmith , US Department of Justice & Aram A. Gavoor , US Department of Justice.

Eric Holder, Attorney General of the United States, Defendant, represented by Aaron S. Goldsmith , US Department of Justice & Aram A. Gavoor , US Department of Justice.

Alejandro Mayorkas, Director, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services, Defendant, represented by Aaron S. Goldsmith , US Department of Justice & Aram A. Gavoor , US Department of Justice.

Perry Rhew, Chief, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Administrative Appeals Office, Defendant, represented by Aaron S. Goldsmith , US Department of Justice & Aram A. Gavoor , US Department of Justice.

Mark Hazuda, Service Center Director, United States Citizenship and Immigration Services Nebraska Service Center, Defendant, represented by Aaron S. Goldsmith , US Department of Justice & Aram A. Gavoor , US Department of Justice.

Robert S. Mueller, III, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Defendant, represented by Aaron S. Goldsmith , US Department of Justice & Aram A. Gavoor , US Department of Justice.

ORDER

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 32) and Plaintiffs' Response in opposition (Dkt. 35). The Court, having reviewed the motion, response, and being otherwise advised in the premises, concludes that the motion should be denied.

BACKGROUND...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases