Ruiz-Romero v. Wendco of P.R., Inc.
| ERNESTO RUIZ-ROMERO |
| WENDCO, of P.R., Inc. |
| 22-1847 |
| November 28, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 17, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| RESPONSE filed by Appellant Ernesto Ruiz-Romero to the Court's Corrected Show Cause Order entered on December 13, 2022 [ # 6537640-2 ]. Certificate of service was not included. [22-1847] (GB) [Entered: 01/17/2023 04:43 PM] |
| NOTICE issued. The following attorney has failed to register for an appellate ECF account and will no longer receive notice of court issued documents in this case: Briseida Torres-Reyes for Wendco. [22-1847] (GB) [Entered: 12/28/2022 09:44 AM] |
| CORRECTED SHOW CAUSE ORDER ENTERED.* Upon review of the record in this case, it appears that this appeal should be dismissed as untimely as it appears that the notice of appeal is not timely as to any order entered in the case. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that appellant either move for voluntary dismissal under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b) or show cause, in writing, why this appeal should not be dismissed. The failure to take either action by December 27, 2022 will lead to dismissal of the appeal for lack of diligent prosecution. *Corrected order issued to amend text of the order. [22-1847] (GB) [Entered: 12/13/2022 01:54 PM] |
ORDER to Show Cause entered directing appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed as untimely. On October 19, 2022, plaintiff-appellant Ernesto Ruiz-Romero filed a notice of appeal in Civil Action No. 3:18-cv-02019-WGY (D.P.R.). This court may not have jurisdiction to consider the appeal as it appears that the notice of appeal is not timely as to any order entered in the case. Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that appellant either move for voluntary dismissal under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b) or show cause, in writing, why this appeal should not be dismissed. The failure to take either action by December 27, 2022 will lead to dismissal of the appeal for lack of diligent prosecution. [22-1847] (GB) [Entered: 12/13/2022 11:04 AM]
|
| NOTICE issued. After 12/27/2022, the following attorney will no longer receive notice of court issued documents in this case unless she registers for an appellate ECF account: Briseida Torres-Reyes for Wendco. [22-1847] (GB) [Entered: 12/13/2022 10:17 AM] |
| CIVIL CASE docketed. Notice of appeal (doc. #37) filed by Appellant Ernesto Ruiz-Romero. [22-1847] (DO) [Entered: 11/28/2022 09:18 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: Ruiz-Romero v. Wendco of P.R., Inc. | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff / appellant: ERNESTO RUIZ-ROMERO | |
| Represented By: | Ernesto Ruiz-Romero |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant / appellee: WENDCO, of P.R., Inc. | |
| Represented By: | Yldefonso Lopez Morales |
| Represented By: | Natalia Marin-Catala |
| Represented By: | Briseida Torres-Reyes |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
