James Muhammad v. Carlos Privat, et al
JAMES KARIM MUHAMMAD |
CARLOS A. PRIVAT and CITY OF RICHMOND |
19-16221 |
June 19, 2019 |
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
Other |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on June 20, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 2 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: JW): The courts records reflect that the notice of appeal was filed during the pendency of a timely-filed motion listed in Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(4), and that motion is still pending in the district court. The June 11, 2019 notice of appeal is therefore ineffective until entry of the order disposing of the last such motion outstanding. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4). Accordingly, proceedings in this court are held in abeyance pending the district courts resolution of the pending February 12, 2019 motion. See Leader Natl Ins. Co. v. Indus. Indem. Ins. Co., 19 F.3d 444, 445 (9th Cir. 1994). Within 14 days after the district courts ruling on the pending motion, appellant shall file a written notice in this court: (1) informing this court of the district courts ruling; and (2) stating whether appellant intends to prosecute this appeal. To appeal the district courts ruling on the post-judgment motion, appellant must file an amended notice of appeal within the time prescribed by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4. The Clerk shall serve this order on the district court. [11339688] (CKP) [Entered: 06/20/2019 03:35 PM] |
Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCE OF PRO SE APPELLANT AND NO APPEARANCE FOR APPELLEES. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant James Karim Muhammad opening brief due 08/12/2019. [11336951] (JMR) [Entered: 06/19/2019 10:28 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.