In re Saipter Corporation
| In re: Saipter Corporation, By and Through its Shareholder, Austin Longacre |
| 26-20235 |
| May 12, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 2, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 34 CLERK ORDER dismissing appeal pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 42 for failure to pay fee [34]; failure to comply with the Court's notice of 06/01/2026 for appointment of counsel [26-20235] (SR) [Entered: 07/02/2026 12:16 PM] |
| Filing 33 COURT ORDER denying Motion for clarification of the court's order denying the motion for reconsideration of the court order denying the motion to proceed pro se filed by Petitioner Saipter Corporation [ # 26 ]; denying appointment of counsel [33] [26-20235] (SR) [Entered: 07/02/2026 12:10 PM] |
| Filing 26 MOTION filed by Petitioner Saipter Corporation for clarification of the Order dated 06/08/2026 denying Motion for reconsideration filed by Petitioner Saipter Corporation in 26-20235 [ # 17 ]. Date of service: 06/15/2026 [26-20235] (SR) [Entered: 06/17/2026 10:10 AM] |
| Filing 25 COURT ORDER denying Motion for reconsideration filed by Petitioner Saipter Corporation [ # 17 ] [26-20235] (SR) [Entered: 06/08/2026 07:45 AM] |
| Filing 17 MOTION filed by Petitioner Saipter Corporation for reconsideration of the 06/01/2026 court order denying Motion to proceed without counsel filed by Petitioner Saipter Corporation in 26-20235 [ # 5 ] [17]. Date of service: 06/03/2026 [26-20235] (SR) [Entered: 06/04/2026 11:43 AM] |
| Filing 16 UPDATED CASE PROCESSING NOTICE sent.Court order denied the motion to proceed with counsel. Monitoring for appointment of counsel and fee.[26-20235] (SR) [Entered: 06/01/2026 09:31 AM] |
| Filing 14 COURT ORDER denying Motion to proceed without counsel filed by Petitioner Saipter Corporation [ # 5 ] [26-20235] (SR) [Entered: 06/01/2026 09:24 AM] |
| Filing 5 MOTION filed by Petitioner Saipter Corporation to proceed without counsel [5]. Date of service: 05/20/2026 [26-20235] (SR) [Entered: 05/28/2026 10:17 AM] |
| Filing 4 JURISDICTIONAL REVIEW COMPLETE. [26-20235] (RA) [Entered: 05/12/2026 12:55 PM] |
| Filing 3 DOCUMENT RECEIVED - NO ACTION TAKEN. No action will be taken at this time on the petitioner's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and file electronically received from Petitioner Saipter Corporation because a pro se cannot represent a corporation or partnership unless they are a licensed attorney admitted to this court [26-20235] (RA) [Entered: 05/12/2026 12:47 PM] |
| Filing 2 PETITION filed by Petitioner Saipter Corporation for writ of mandamus [2] Date received in 5th Circuit: 05/08/2026. Miscellaneous due on 05/27/2026 for Petitioner Saipter Corporation. Date of Service: 05/08/2026 Document is insufficient for the following reasons: corporations cannot represent themselves; a pro se cannot represent a corporation unless they are a licensed attorney admitted to this court. [26-20235] (RA) [Entered: 05/12/2026 12:39 PM] |
| Filing 1 ORIGINAL PROCEEDING CASE docketed. [26-20235] (RA) [Entered: 05/12/2026 12:37 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.
| Search for this case: In re Saipter Corporation | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: In re: Saipter Corporation, By and Through its Shareholder, Austin Longacre | |
| Represented By: | Saipter Corporation |
| 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 | [ 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.
