In re: Patrick Byrne, et al
| In re: PETER TICKTIN, STEPHANIE LAMBERT, PATRICK BYRNE, STEVEN LUCESCU and THE AMERICA PROJECT, INC. |
| ERIC COOMER |
| SERVICE |
| 25-13251 |
| September 18, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 14, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 12
ORDER: Motion for writ of mandamus filed by Petitioners Patrick Byrne and Attorney Stephanie Lambert, Esquire is DENIED. [ # 1 ], [ # 4 ]; AJ, JP and KCN (See attached order for complete text) [Entered: 10/14/2025 02:38 PM]
|
| Filing 11 NOTICE OF CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PERSONS (CIP) DEFICIENCY issued to Mr. Peter David Ticktin for Patrick Byrne and Stephanie Lambert. You have failed to complete the Web-Based CIP on the Court's website. 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(s). [Entered: 10/03/2025 09:26 AM] |
| Filing 10 Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by Attorney Mr. Peter David Ticktin for Petitioners Patrick Byrne and Stephanie Lambert. On the same day the CIP is served, any filer represented by counsel 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. 26.1-1(b). [25-13251] (ECF: Peter Ticktin) [Entered: 10/01/2025 04:27 PM] |
| Filing 9 Certificate of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statement filed by. On the same day the CIP is served, any filer represented by counsel 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. 26.1-1(b). [25-13251] (ECF: Charles Cain) [Entered: 10/01/2025 12:48 PM] |
| Filing 8 APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Ashley Morgan for Eric Coomer. Related cases? No. [25-13251] (ECF: Ashley Morgan) [Entered: 10/01/2025 12:25 PM] |
| Filing 7 APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Brad Kloewer for Eric Coomer. Related cases? No. [25-13251] (ECF: Brad Kloewer) [Entered: 10/01/2025 12:23 PM] |
| Filing 6 APPEARANCE of Counsel Form filed by Charles J. Cain for Eric Coomer. Related cases? No. [25-13251] (ECF: Charles Cain) [Entered: 10/01/2025 12:19 PM] |
| Filing 5 Petitioner's Notice of Withdrawal of Motion for Stay Pending Consideration of Petitioner's Petition for Writ of Mandamus filed by Attorney Mr. Peter David Ticktin for Petitioners Patrick Byrne and Stephanie Lambert. [25-13251] (ECF: Peter Ticktin) [Entered: 09/29/2025 03:24 PM] |
| Filing 4 Corrected Motion [ # 1 ] filed by Petitioner Peter Ticktin. [25-13251] (ECF: Peter Ticktin) [Entered: 09/22/2025 04:04 PM] |
| Filing 3 Notice that no action will be taken on Motion to stay further appellate proceedings [ # 2 ] filed by Attorney Mr. Peter David Ticktin for Petitioners Peter Ticktin and Patrick Byrne. Reason(s) no action being taken on filing(s): The filing is deficient for failure to comply with this Court's rules on Certificates of Interested Persons and Corporate Disclosure Statements. See 11th Cir. R. 26.1-1. [Entered: 09/19/2025 12:35 PM] |
| Filing 2 MOTION to stay further appellate proceedings filed by Petitioner Peter Ticktin. Opposition to Motion is Unknown [2] [Entered: 09/19/2025 12:34 PM] |
| Filing 1 ORIGINAL PROCEEDING DOCKETED. Petition for WRIT of MANDAMUS filed by Petitioners Patrick Byrne and Attorney Stephanie Lambert, Esquire. Fee Status: Fee Paid--[Edited 09/23/2025 by FRM] [Entered: 09/19/2025 12:25 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.
