ADT v. Richmond
| ADT, L.L.C. |
| Darryl Rochmond, Individually and as next friend of D.R., J.R. and E.R., minors, Kamala Richmond and Darryl Richmond, Individually and as next friend of D.R., J.R. and E.R., minors |
| 21-10023 |
| January 13, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 9, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| PROPOSED SUFFICIENT BRIEF filed by Appellant ADT, L.L.C. [ # 9519952-2 ] Date of service: 03/09/2021 via email - Attorney for Appellants: Eblen, Scott; Attorney for Appellee: Wangler [21-10023] (Charles C. Eblen ) [Entered: 03/09/2021 04:19 PM] |
| SUFFICIENT APPELLANT'S BRIEF FILED # of Copies Provided: 0 Sufficient Brief deadline satisfied [21-10023] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: APPELLANT'S BRIEF FILED Brief NOT Sufficient as it requires a single statement of the case with incorporated statement of the case for appellant's brief. Additionally the Brief requires exhibits to brief are not allowed; Record Excerpts must filed. If the exhibit is part of the record it can be filed in the record excerpts. Instructions to Attorney: PLEASE READ THE ATTACHED NOTICE FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO REMEDY THE DEFAULT. A/Pet's Brief deadline satisfied. Record Excerpts due on 03/23/2021 for Appellant ADT, L.L.C.. Sufficient Brief due on 03/23/2021 for Appellant ADT, L.L.C... Appellee's Brief due on 04/07/2021 for Appellees Darryl Richmond and Kamala Richmond [21-10023] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: APPELLANT'S BRIEF FILED by ADT, L.L.C.. Date of service: 03/08/2021 via email - Attorney for Appellants: Eblen, Scott; Attorney for Appellee: Wangler [21-10023] (Charles C. Eblen ) [Entered: 03/08/2021 04:15 PM] |
| LETTER OF ADVISEMENT. Reason: revised caption [21-10023] (LEF) [Entered: 02/17/2021 08:58 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Ryan Wangler for Appellee Darryl Rochmond in 21-10023, Attorney Ryan Wangler for Appellee Kamala Richmond in 21-10023 [21-10023] (MVM) [Entered: 02/08/2021 08:21 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM received from Mr. Ryan Wangler for Ms. Kamala Richmond and Mr. Darryl Rochmond for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [21-10023] (Ryan Wangler ) [Entered: 02/04/2021 05:17 PM] |
| BRIEFING NOTICE ISSUED A/Pet's Brief Due on 03/08/2021 for Appellant ADT, L.L.C.. [21-10023] (MRW) [Entered: 01/25/2021 11:12 AM] |
| ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL FILED. Admitted Exhibits on File in District Court? No. Video/Audio Exhibits on File in District Court? No Electronic ROA deadline satisfied. [21-10023] (MRW) [Entered: 01/25/2021 11:11 AM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Jason Robert Scott for Appellant ADT, L.L.C. in 21-10023 [21-10023] (MVM) [Entered: 01/22/2021 02:27 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney(s) Charles C. Eblen for party(s) Appellant ADT, L.L.C., in case 21-10023 [21-10023] (CAS) [Entered: 01/22/2021 02:22 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [21-10023] (Charles C. Eblen ) [Entered: 01/21/2021 02:25 PM] |
| APPEARANCE FORM received from Mr. Jason Robert Scott for ADT, L.L.C. for the court's review. Lead Counsel? No. [21-10023] (Jason Robert Scott ) [Entered: 01/21/2021 02:36 PM] |
| INITIAL CASE CHECK by Attorney Advisor complete, Action: Case OK to Process. [9484884-2] Initial AA Check Due satisfied. [21-10023] (MVM) [Entered: 01/19/2021 02:42 PM] |
| ELECTRONIC RECORD ON APPEAL REQUESTED from District Court for 4:20-CV-759. Electronic ROA due on 02/03/2021. [21-10023] (MVM) [Entered: 01/19/2021 02:45 PM] |
| PRIVATE CIVIL FEDERAL CASE docketed. NOA filed by Appellant ADT, L.L.C. [21-10023] (LEF) [Entered: 01/13/2021 03:46 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.
