Anthony Smith v. Rosana Lim-Javate, et al
| ANTHONY TYRONE SMITH |
| DARRIN BRIGHT and ROSANA LIM-JAVATE |
| 19-15115 |
| January 23, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 22, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 MANDATE ISSUED. (WCC, SPG and MMM) [11238463] (CW) [Entered: 03/22/2019 07:25 AM] |
| Filing 2 Filed order (WILLIAM C. CANBY, SUSAN P. GRABER and M. MARGARET MCKEOWN): A review of the record demonstrates that this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because the notice of appeal, served on January 11, 2019 and filed on January 22, 2019, was not filed or delivered to prison officials within 30 days after the district courts judgment entered on November 9, 2017. See 28 U.S.C. 2107(a); United States v. Sadler, 480 F.3d 932, 937 (9th Cir. 2007) (requirement of timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional); see also Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205 (2007) (court lacks authority to create equitable exceptions to jurisdictional requirement of timely notice of appeal). Consequently, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. DISMISSED. [11211840] (AF) [Entered: 02/28/2019 03:14 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Anthony Tyrone Smith opening brief due 03/25/2019. Appellees Darrin Bright and Rosana Lim-Javate answering brief due 04/22/2019. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11163175] (JPD) [Entered: 01/23/2019 11:21 AM] |
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.
