Reardon v. Oswald, et al
| ARTHUR REARDON |
| MITCHELL OSWALD |
| 25-1660 |
| July 18, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 18, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| MANDATE issued. [25-1660] (GB) [Entered: 11/18/2025 03:46 AM] |
| JUDGMENT dismissing case in accordance with 1st Cir. R. 3.0(b). 25-1660 Defaulted. [25-1660] (JW) [Entered: 10/27/2025 01:40 PM] |
ORDER entered: Appellee's unopposed motion to stay briefing pending the court's decision on the motion for summary disposition is granted. [25-1660] (JW) [Entered: 10/08/2025 12:17 PM]
|
| NOTICE of appearance on behalf of Appellee Mitchell Oswald filed by Attorney Andrew K. Lizotte. Served on 09/22/2025. [25-1660] (AKL) [Entered: 09/22/2025 09:57 AM] |
|
ORDER entered. Upon consideration of Appellee's motion, the time to file Appellee's brief is enlarged to and including October 17, 2025 , pending consideration of Appellee's request to stay the briefing schedule. [25-1660] (GB) [Entered: 09/17/2025 08:54 AM]
|
| MOTION to stay Further Briefing , MOTION to modify the briefing schedule, or MOTION to extend the time for filing Appellees brief filed by Appellee Mitchell Oswald. Served on 09/16/2025. [25-1660] CLERK'S NOTE: Relief selection was incomplete. Correction made by clerk's office. No further action required. (THT) [Entered: 09/16/2025 10:47 AM] |
|
ORDER entered: Appellant's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP") is denied without prejudice to filing a compliant motion and financial affidavit in the district court in Docket No. 1:25-cv-00093-SJM (D. Me.). See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a). A compliant request for in forma pauperis status consists of a motion and fully completed Form 4, financial affidavit, with a prison trust account statement, if appellant is incarcerated. A copy of Form 4 is enclosed to the appellant. Failure to either pay the $605.00 filing fee, or, alternatively, to file a compliant request for in forma pauperis status in the district court by September 17, 2025 will result in the appeal being dismissed for lack of diligent prosecution. See 1st Cir. R. 3.0(b). [25-1660] (JW) [Entered: 09/03/2025 04:43 PM]
|
| MOTION to proceed in forma pauperis filed by Appellant Arthur Reardon. Certificate of service was not included. [25-1660] (JW) [Entered: 08/19/2025 08:38 PM] |
| APPELLANT'S BRIEF filed by Appellant Arthur Reardon. Number of copies: 4. Five paper copies identical to that of the filed brief must be submitted so that they are received by the court on or before 08/25/2025 . Brief due 09/17/2025 for APPELLEE Mitchell Oswald. [25-1660]. CLERK'S NOTE: Docket entry was edited to modify the docket text. (NP) [Entered: 08/18/2025 03:51 PM] |
| RESPONSE filed by Appellant Arthur Reardon to motion for summary disposition [ # 6742114-2 ]. Certificate of service was not included. [25-1660] (JW) [Entered: 08/19/2025 08:43 PM] |
| MOTION for summary disposition filed by Appellee Mitchell Oswald. Served on 08/08/2025. [25-1660] (THT) [Entered: 08/08/2025 08:07 AM] |
| CORRECTED MOTION for summary disposition filed by Appellee Mitchell Oswald. Served on 08/08/2025. [25-1660] (THT) [Entered: 08/08/2025 03:02 PM] |
| BRIEFING schedule set. Brief due 09/10/2025 for appellant Arthur Reardon. Pursuant to F.R.A.P. 31(a), appellee's brief will be due 30 days following service of appellant's brief and appellant's reply brief will be due 21 days following service of appellee's brief. [25-1660] (GB) [Entered: 08/01/2025 12:07 PM] |
| NOTICE of appearance on behalf of Appellee Mitchell Oswald filed by Attorney Trevor H. Taniguchi. Served on 07/22/2025. [25-1660] (THT) [Entered: 07/22/2025 12:50 PM] |
| CIVIL CASE docketed. Notice of appeal (doc. #22) filed by Appellant Arthur Reardon. Fee due 08/01/2025 . [25-1660] (GB) [Entered: 07/18/2025 08:45 AM] |
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: Reardon v. Oswald, et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: ARTHUR REARDON | |
| Represented By: | Arthur Reardon |
| 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: MITCHELL OSWALD | |
| Represented By: | Trevor Haruo Taniguchi |
| Represented By: | Andrew Kenney Lizotte |
| 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.
