Colton Creek XII LLC, et al v. Keon Hindsman
| COLTON CREEK XII LLC and COLTON CREEK XIX LLC |
| KEON DEONTAE HINDSMAN |
| 25-12394 |
| July 15, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Rent, Lease, Ejectment |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 3, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 11 Notice that no action will be taken on the appellant brief and motion to proceed In Forma Pauperis submitted by the appellant because he has not complied with the Court's August 14, 2025, order. [Entered: 10/03/2025 04:38 PM] |
| Filing 10 Notice that no action will be taken on the appellant's motion to reinstate the appeal because the required appellant brief hasn't been submitted. [ # 9 ] [Entered: 09/29/2025 08:35 AM] |
| Filing 9 MOTION to reinstate appeal filed by Appellant Keon Deontae Hindsman. [9] [Entered: 09/29/2025 08:33 AM] |
Filing 8
ORDER: Pursuant to the 11th Cir. R. 42-1(b), this appeal is hereby DISMISSED for want of prosecution because the appellant Keon Deontae Hindsman failed to comply with the order of this court and has failed to file an appellant brief within the time fixed by the rules [Entered: 09/16/2025 08:04 AM]
|
| Filing 7 Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Appellant Keon Deontae Hindsman. [Entered: 09/16/2025 07:57 AM] |
| Filing 6 NOTICE OF CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS (CIP) DEFICIENCY issued to Keon Deontae Hindsman. The appellant has failed to file a compliant CIP. Pursuant to 11th Cir. Rules 26.1-5(c) and 42-1(b), this appeal will be dismissed without further notice upon the expiration of 14 days from the date of this notice unless the appellant corrects the default. [Entered: 09/04/2025 04:01 PM] |
| Filing 5 Notice that no action will be taken on the CIP submitted by the appellant because it is not legible. The appellant must file a legible CIP within 14 days from this date. [Entered: 08/26/2025 10:28 AM] |
|
Filing 4
ORDER: Appellant Keon Hindsman did not sign the instant notice of appeal, as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a). While this is not a jurisdictional defect, it is nevertheless one that must be corrected for the appeal to proceed. See Becker v. Montgomery, 532 U.S. 757, 760 (2001). Accordingly, Appellant is DIRECTED to file a substitute, signed notice of appeal in the district court within fourteen days. Failure to comply with this order will result in the dismissal of this appeal without further notice. See 11th Cir. R. 42 1(b). The Clerk is DIRECTED to provide a copy of this Order to the district court. The district court shall transmit to this Court any signed notice of appeal filed in compliance with this Order. RJL [Entered: 08/14/2025 11:22 AM]
|
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS (CIP) DEFICIENCY issued to Keon Deontae Hindsman. You have failed to file the standalone CIP. If you are an appellant or petitioner, pursuant to 11th Cir. Rules 26.1-5(c) and 42-1(b), this appeal will be dismissed without further notice upon the expiration of 14 days from the date of this notice unless you remedy the default. [Entered: 08/05/2025 08:16 AM] |
| Filing 2 Briefing Notice issued to Appellant Keon Deontae Hindsman. The appellant's brief is due on or before 08/25/2025. The appendix is due no later than 7 days from the filing of the appellant's brief. [Entered: 07/15/2025 04:02 PM] |
| Filing 1 CIVIL APPEAL DOCKETED. Notice of appeal filed by Appellant Keon Deontae Hindsman on 07/14/2025. Fee Status: IFP Granted. Awaiting Appellant's Certificate of Interested Persons due on or before 08/04/2025 as to Appellant Keon Deontae Hindsman. [Entered: 07/15/2025 03:59 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.
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.
