Retcnick Fausten v. AT&T Services Inc.
| RETCNICK FAUSTEN |
| AT&T SERVICES INC. |
| 22-10096 |
| January 12, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Other Personal Injury |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 6, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Notice of receipt: Notice from appellant that he intends to pay the filing fees in district court as to Appellant Retcnick Fausten. NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN. [Entered: 06/14/2022 01:57 PM] |
| MOTION for reconsideration of clerk's order filed by Appellant Retcnick Fausten. Opposition to Motion is Unknown [9634011-1] [Entered: 04/01/2022 10:51 AM] |
| No action will be taken on Motion for reconsideration of clerk's order [ # 9634011-2 ]. Motion filed by Appellant Retcnick Fausten does not show he has satisfied the deficiency. No further action will be taken until the full $505 filing fees have been paid or a motion for relief from obligation has been filed in district court. The court will not consider a motion to reinstate until the fees have been resolved. [Entered: 04/01/2022 10:55 AM] |
| No action will be taken on Motion to reinstate appeal [ # 9629953-2 ]. Motion filed by Appellant Retcnick Fausten is deficient for failure to comply with this court's rules on Certificates of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statements. [Entered: 03/28/2022 11:11 AM] |
| MOTIONfor Reconsideration construed as motion to reinstate appeal filed by Appellant Retcnick Fausten. Opposition to Motion is Unknown [9629953-1] [Entered: 03/28/2022 11:08 AM] |
| No action will be taken on Motion to reinstate appeal [ # 9618141-2 ]. Motion filed by Appellant Retcnick Fausten is deficient for failure to comply with this court's rules on Certificates of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statements. [Entered: 03/11/2022 03:42 PM] |
| MOTION for Reconsideration construed as motion to reinstate appeal filed by Appellant Retcnick Fausten. Opposition to Motion is Unknown [9618141-1] [Entered: 03/11/2022 03:41 PM] |
| Public Communication:. Appellant's Letter of Inquiry [Entered: 03/08/2022 10:09 AM] |
ORDER: Pursuant to the 11th Cir. R. 42-1(b), this appeal is DISMISSED for want of prosecution because the Appellant Retcnick Fausten failed to pay the filing and docketing fees (or file a motion in the district court for relief from the obligation to pay in advance the full fee) to the district court within the time fixed by the rules [Entered: 02/22/2022 04:11 PM]
|
| Appellant's Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Appellant Retcnick Fausten. [Entered: 02/03/2022 12:53 PM] |
| PRISONER (PLRA) APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellant Retcnick Fausten on 01/11/2022. Fee Status: Fee Not Paid.. [Entered: 01/19/2022 04:39 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: Retcnick Fausten v. AT&T Services 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: RETCNICK FAUSTEN | |
| Represented By: | Retcnick Fausten |
| 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: AT&T SERVICES INC. | |
| Represented By: | Britney Annette Quow |
| 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.
