US v. Neves
| JUSTIN NEVES, a/k/a Sav, a/k/a Savage, a/k/a Brandon |
| UNITED STATES |
| 25-1379 |
| April 18, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 4, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| JUDGMENT entered. Upon consideration of appellant's unopposed motion, it is hereby ordered that this appeal be voluntarily dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 42(b)(2). Mandate to issue forthwith. [25-1379] (GB) [Entered: 08/04/2025 12:03 PM] |
| MANDATE issued. [25-1379] (GB) [Entered: 08/04/2025 12:05 PM] |
| CERTIFICATE of service for motion to dismiss case [ # 6731227-2 ] filed by Appellant Justin Neves. Served on 07/14/2025. [25-1379] (DJB) [Entered: 07/14/2025 10:36 AM] |
| MOTION to dismiss case filed by Appellant Justin Neves in 25-1379. Served on 06/24/2025. [25-1379] CLERK'S NOTE: Document should not have been filed in additional case, 25-1365. Correction made by clerk's office. No further action required. (DJB) [Entered: 06/24/2025 08:41 PM] |
ORDER to Show Cause entered directing appellant to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Show cause response due 06/30/2025 . [25-1379] (GB) [Entered: 06/16/2025 01:10 PM]
|
| NOTICE of appearance on behalf of Appellee US filed by Attorney Lindsay B. Feinberg. Served on 05/09/2025. [25-1379] (LF) [Entered: 05/09/2025 11:54 AM] |
| DOCKETING statement filed by Appellant Justin Neves in 25-1379. Served on 05/01/2025. [25-1379] CLERK'S NOTE: Document should not have been filed in additional case 25-1365. Correction made by clerk's office. No further action required. (DJB) [Entered: 05/01/2025 04:43 PM] |
| TRANSCRIPT report/order form filed by Appellant Justin Neves in 25-1379 indicating transcripts are not necessary for this appeal. Served on 05/01/2025. [25-1379] CLERK'S NOTE: Document should not have been filed in additional case 25-1365. Correction made by clerk's office. No further action required. (DJB) [Entered: 05/01/2025 04:45 PM] |
| NOTICE of appearance on behalf of Appellant Justin Neves in 25-1379 filed by Attorney David J. Bobrow, Esq.. Served on 05/01/2025. [25-1379] CLERK'S NOTE: Document should not have been filed in additional case 25-1365. Correction made by clerk's office. No further action required. (DJB) [Entered: 05/01/2025 04:48 PM] |
| CRIMINAL CASE docketed. Notice of appeal (doc. #87) filed by Appellant Justin Neves. Appearance form, Docketing Statement and Transcript Report/Order form due 05/02/2025 . [25-1379] (GB) [Entered: 04/18/2025 12:42 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: US v. Neves | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Appellee: UNITED STATES | |
| Represented By: | Johnathan G. Nathans |
| Represented By: | Nicholas S. Heimbach |
| Represented By: | Lindsay Feinberg |
| Represented By: | Noah Falk |
| 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 | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: JUSTIN NEVES, a/k/a Sav, a/k/a Savage, a/k/a Brandon | |
| Represented By: | David J. Bobrow |
| Represented By: | Justin Neves |
| 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 | [ 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.
