Atakapa Indian de Creole v. Donald Trump, et al
| Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation |
| Melinda Mitchell, Mayor, Sharon Weston Broome, Mayor, John Bel Edwards, Governor, LaToya Cantrell, Mayor and Murphy J. Paul, Jr., Baton Rouge Police Chief |
| 20-30461 |
| July 24, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| Atakapa Indian de Creole v. Edwards, et al |
| Atakapa Indian de Creole v. Edwards, et al |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 8, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| CLERK ORDER granting Motion to reopen case filed by Appellant Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation [ # 9382698-2 ] [20-30461] (MAS) [Entered: 09/08/2020 03:30 PM] |
| MOTION to proceed in forma pauperis [9392905-2]. Date of service: 09/03/2020 [20-30461] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: UNOPPOSED MOTION filed by Appellant Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation to proceed in forma pauperis [9392905-2]. Date of service: 09/03/2020 via email - Attorney for Appellant: Moses [20-30461] (Edward Moses Jr.) [Entered: 09/03/2020 08:56 PM] |
| AFFIDAVIT OF FINANCIAL STATUS filed by Appellant Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation in support of the Motion to proceed IFP filed by Appellant Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation in 20-30461 [ # 9392905-2 ].. [20-30461] (MAS) [Entered: 09/08/2020 03:21 PM] |
| The Motion to reopen case filed by Appellant Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation in 20-30461 [ # 9382698-2 ] has been made sufficient. Sufficient Mtn/Resp/Rpl deadline satisfied. [20-30461] (MAS) [Entered: 09/04/2020 08:30 AM] |
| DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the Affidavit of Financial Status received from Appellant Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation because A Motion for permission to appeal in forma pauperis is required to be filed with the affidavit [20-30461] (MAS) [Entered: 08/21/2020 09:15 AM] |
| MOTION to reopen case [9382698-2] Default has NOT been remedied (Affidait requires a motion to proceed IFP). Date of service: 08/20/2020 Document is insufficient for the following reasons: Motion requires a signature, certificate of serviice and certificate of compliance and certificate of conference Sufficient Mtn/Resp/Reply due on 08/31/2020 for Appellant Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation [20-30461] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: UNOPPOSED MOTION filed by Appellant Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation to reopen case [9382698-2]. Date of service: 08/20/2020 via email - Attorney for Appellant: Moses [20-30461] (Edward Moses Jr.) [Entered: 08/20/2020 07:57 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Edward Moses Jr. for Appellant Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation in 20-30461 [20-30461] (MAS) [Entered: 08/20/2020 09:43 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [20-30461] (Edward Moses Jr.) [Entered: 08/20/2020 06:15 AM] |
| CLERK ORDER dismissing appeal pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 42 for failure to pay fee [9381680-2] [20-30461] (MAS) [Entered: 08/19/2020 04:57 PM] |
| INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete, Action: Case OK to Process. [9366005-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. Fee due on 08/13/2020, for Appellant Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation. [20-30461] (DLJ) [Entered: 07/29/2020 12:23 PM] |
| PARTY LIMIT CASE. (FOR A FULL LIST OF DEFENDANTS - APPELLEES FOR THIS APPEAL, PLEASE REFER TO THE DISTRICT COURT'S DOCKET SHEET.) [20-30461] (DLJ) [Entered: 07/24/2020 02:51 PM] |
| US CIVIL CASE docketed. NOA filed by Appellant Atakapa Indian de Creole Nation. [20-30461] (DLJ) [Entered: 07/24/2020 02:39 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.
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.
