Timothy Hatten v. USA
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| TIMOTHY HATTEN |
| 20-11879 |
| May 19, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 9, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| ENTRY OF DISMISSAL: Pursuant to the 11th Cir.R.42-1(b), this appeal is DISMISSED for want of prosecution because the appellant Timothy Hatten failed to pay the filing and docketing fees to the district court, or alternatively, file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in the district court within the time fixed by the rules [Entered: 07/09/2020 05:46 PM] |
| This APPELLANT has been notified that upon expiration of fourteen (14) days from this date, this appeal will be dismissed by the clerk without further notice unless the required filing fee has been received or a motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis is filed in the District Court. The appellant is being served with this letter. [Entered: 06/09/2020 11:50 AM] |
| Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Attorney Kathryn Dalzell for Appellee USA. On the same day the CIP is served, the party filing it must also complete the court's web-based stock ticker symbol certificate at the link here http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/web-based-cip or on the court's website. See 11th Cir. R. 26.1-2(b). [20-11879] (ECF: Kathryn Dalzell) [Entered: 06/04/2020 02:23 PM] |
| NOTICE OF CIP FILING DEFICIENCY to Timothy Hatten. You are receiving this notice because you have not completed the Certificate of Interested Persons (CIP). Failure to comply with 11th Cir. Rules 26.1-1 through 26.1-4 may result in dismissal of the case or appeal under 11th Cir. R. 42-1(b), return of deficient documents without action, or other sanctions on counsel, the party, or both. [Entered: 06/03/2020 12:41 PM] |
| APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Kathryn Dalzell for USA [20-11879] (ECF: Kathryn Dalzell) [Entered: 06/03/2020 09:53 AM] |
| APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Emily M. Smachetti for USA. [20-11879] (ECF: Emily Smachetti) [Entered: 05/27/2020 01:13 PM] |
| CIVIL APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellant Timothy Hatten on 05/19/2020. Fee Status: Fee Not Paid. No hearings to be transcribed. Awaiting Appellant's Certificate of Interested Persons due on or before 06/02/2020 as to Appellant Timothy Hatten. Awaiting Appellee's Certificate of Interested Persons due on or before 06/16/2020 as to Appellee United States of America [Entered: 05/21/2020 01:20 PM] |
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: Timothy Hatten v. USA | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant / appellee: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | |
| Represented By: | U.S. Attorney Service - Southern District of Florida |
| Represented By: | Emily M. Smachetti |
| Represented By: | Kathryn Dalzell |
| 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 ] |
| Plaintiff / appellant: TIMOTHY HATTEN | |
| Represented By: | Timothy Hatten |
| 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.
