Javontai Thames v. James Gill
JAVONTAI THAMES |
JAMES GILL |
20-13299 |
September 1, 2020 |
U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
Other |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on October 22, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Public Communication: Letter from Pro Se Appellant requesting status of appeal. [Entered: 10/28/2020 02:47 PM] |
MOTION for certificate of appealability construed from the notice of appeal filed by Appellant Javontai Thames. Opposition to Motion is Unknown [9215887-1] [Entered: 10/19/2020 05:41 PM] |
Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Attorney Thomas Howland Duffy for Appellee James Gill. 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). [20-13299] (ECF: Thomas Duffy) [Entered: 10/07/2020 10:41 PM] |
Appellant's Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Appellant Javontai Thames. [Entered: 10/08/2020 01:35 PM] |
Public Communication: Letter from Pro Se Appellant concerning certificate of interested persons. [Entered: 10/08/2020 01:42 PM] |
APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Thomas Howland Duffy for James Gill [20-13299] (ECF: Thomas Duffy) [Entered: 09/29/2020 05:06 PM] |
Appellant's Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Appellant Javontai Thames. [Entered: 09/30/2020 05:33 PM] |
Supplemental Motion to proceed in forma pauperis [ # 9190068-2 ] filed by Appellant Javontai Thames. [Entered: 09/30/2020 05:32 PM] |
NOTICE OF CIP FILING DEFICIENCY to Javontai Thames. 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: 09/22/2020 09:40 AM] |
MOTION to proceed IFP filed by Appellant Javontai Thames. Opposition to Motion is Unknown [9190068-1] [Entered: 09/17/2020 08:53 AM] |
USDC order denying COA as to Appellant Javontai Thames was filed on 08/13/2020. Docket Entry 25. [Entered: 09/04/2020 09:07 AM] |
USDC order denying IFP as to Appellant Javontai Thames was filed on 09/03/2020. Docket Entry 32. [Entered: 09/04/2020 09:08 AM] |
HABEAS APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellant Javontai Thames on 09/01/2020. Fee Status: Fee Not Paid. No hearings to be transcribed. [Entered: 09/04/2020 09:00 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: Javontai Thames v. James Gill | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Petitioner / appellant: JAVONTAI THAMES | |
Represented By: | Javontai Thames |
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 ] |
Respondent / appellee: JAMES GILL | |
Represented By: | Holly Noel Simcox |
Represented By: | Ashley Moody |
Represented By: | Thomas Howland Duffy |
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.