In re: Manuel Arroyo
| In re: Manuel Arroyo |
| Fox Corporation, Fox Media, L.L.C. and Fox Sports En Espanol, L.L.C. |
| 26-20495 |
| September 1, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 4, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 28 COURT ORDER denying Petition for writ of mandamus filed by Petitioner Mr. Manuel Arroyo [ # 2 ]. [26-20495] (DLJ) [Entered: 09/04/2026 12:43 PM] |
| Filing 26 COURT ORDER denying opposed motion for stay of district court proceedings pending disposition of the petition for writ of mandamus [ # 5 ]; and denying opposed alternative motion for an immediate administrative stay of the district court order of August 3, 2026, filed by Petitioner Mr. Manuel Arroyo [ # 5 ]. [26-20495] (DLJ) [Entered: 09/04/2026 12:36 PM] |
| Filing 19 REPLY filed by Petitioner Mr. Manuel Arroyo [19] to the Response/Opposition filed by Respondents Fox Corporation, Fox Media, L.L.C. and Fox Sports En Espanol, L.L.C. [ # 17 ]. Date of Service: 09/03/2026 via US mail - Attorney for Respondents: Berg, Petti; email - Attorney for Respondents: Hurst, Tucker; Attorney for Petitioners: Ronquillo, Shaver. [26-20495] (Steven R. Shaver ) [Entered: 09/03/2026 12:27 PM] |
| Filing 17 RESPONSE/OPPOSITION [17] to the Motion for stay pending appeal filed by Petitioner Mr. Manuel Arroyo in 26-20495 [ # 5 ], Motion to stay order filed by Petitioner Mr. Manuel Arroyo in 26-20495 [ # 5 ] Date of Service: 09/02/2026. [26-20495] REVIEWED AND/OR EDITED - The original text prior to review appeared as follows: RESPONSE/OPPOSITION filed by Fox Corporation, Fox Media, L.L.C. and Fox Sports En Espanol, L.L.C. [17] to the Motion filed by Petitioner Mr. Manuel Arroyo [ # 5 ], Motion filed by Petitioner Mr. Manuel Arroyo [ # 5 ] Date of Service: 09/02/2026 via email - Attorney for Respondents: Berg, Hurst, Petti, Tucker; Attorney for Petitioners: Ronquillo, Shaver. [26-20495] (David Michael Hurst Jr.) [Entered: 09/02/2026 05:15 PM] |
| Filing 16 APPEARANCE FORM FILED by Attorney Steven R. Shaver for Petitioner Manuel Arroyo in 26-20495. [26-20495] (DLJ) [Entered: 09/02/2026 03:43 PM] |
| Filing 14 LETTER filed by Petitioner Mr. Manuel Arroyo referencing Motion filed by Petitioner Mr. Manuel Arroyo [ # 5 ], Motion filed by Petitioner Mr. Manuel Arroyo [ # 5 ]. Date of Service: 09/02/2026 via US mail - Attorney for Respondents: Berg, Petti; email - Attorney for Respondents: Hurst, Tucker; Attorney for Petitioners: Ronquillo, Shaver [26-20495] (Steven R. Shaver ) [Entered: 09/02/2026 02:49 PM] |
| Filing 13 APPEARANCE FORM for the court's review. Lead Counsel? Yes. [26-20495] (Steven R. Shaver ) [Entered: 09/02/2026 02:46 PM] |
| Filing 11 LETTER OF ADVISEMENT. Reason: advising parties of after hours procedure [26-20495] (MVM) [Entered: 09/01/2026 10:29 AM] |
| Filing 5 OPPOSED MOTION filed by Petitioner Mr. Manuel Arroyo for stay pending disposition of petition for writ of mandamus [5] Ruling is requested by: 09/03/2026, alternatively, for an administrative stay of the district court order dated 08/03/2026 [5]. [26-20495] (MVM) [Entered: 09/01/2026 09:56 AM] |
| Filing 4 JURISDICTIONAL REVIEW COMPLETE. [26-20495] (MVM) [Entered: 09/01/2026 09:51 AM] |
| Filing 3 EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT of Petition for writ of mandamus [ # 2 ] filed by Petitioner Mr. Manuel Arroyo [26-20495] (MVM) [Entered: 09/01/2026 09:50 AM] |
| Filing 2 PETITION filed by Petitioner Mr. Manuel Arroyo for writ of mandamus [2] Date received in 5th Circuit: 09/01/2026.. [26-20495] (MVM) [Entered: 09/01/2026 09:48 AM] |
| Filing 1 ORIGINAL PROCEEDING CASE docketed. [26-20495] (MVM) [Entered: 09/01/2026 09:44 AM] |
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.
