James White v. Mark Pazin, et al
| JOE SCOTT, Commander at Merced County Sheriff's Department, BLODGETT, Sergeant at Merced County Sheriff's Department, MARK N. PAZIN, Sheriff/Coroner (Sheriff Administration), TOM CAVALLERO, Sheriff's Administration, MERCED COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATION, BLAKE, Sheriff's Administration and THORESON, Commander at Merced County Sheriff's Department |
| JAMES E. WHITE |
| COUNTY OF MERCED |
| 19-15793 |
| April 18, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 3, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 Received PLRA authorization response from appellant. Dated 04/26/2019. [11287503] (NAC) [Entered: 05/06/2019 12:00 PM] |
| Filing 4 Filed Appellant James E. White motion to appoint pro bono counsel. Deficiencies: None. Served on 04/26/2019. [11287497] (NAC) [Entered: 05/06/2019 11:59 AM] |
| Filing 3 CLERK ORDER FILED (Deputy Clerk CKP) Prisoner fee authorization form sent to prisoner. [11270249] (CKP) [Entered: 04/19/2019 12:04 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed Appellant James E. White motion to appoint pro bono counsel. Deficiencies: None. Served on 04/17/2019. [11268415] (JMR) [Entered: 04/18/2019 10:40 AM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Transcript ordered by 05/17/2019. Transcript due 06/17/2019. Appellant James E. White opening brief due 07/26/2019. Appellee County of Merced answering brief due 08/26/2019. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11268402] (JMR) [Entered: 04/18/2019 10:36 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.
