Eric Alston , Jr. v. County of Sacramento, et al
SCOTT JONES, Sheriff, MADRIAGO, Deputy, #1337, COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, KEN LLOYD, Deputy, #833, EMILY BALL, Deputy, #823, RIVIERA, Deputy, ERIC BUEHLER, Captain, JESSE INIGUEZ, Deputy #91, CONNOR MILLIGAN, Sgt., #229 and TRUMMEL, Deputy |
ERIC ANTHONY ALSTON, Jr. |
19-16225 |
June 20, 2019 |
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
Other |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on July 30, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 3 Filed order (MARY M. SCHROEDER, WILLIAM C. CANBY and MORGAN B. CHRISTEN) Appellees motion to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction is granted (Docket Entry No. [ # 2 ]). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Chacon v. Babcock, 640 F.2d 221, 222 (9th Cir. 1981) (order is not appealable unless it disposes of all claims as to all parties or judgment is entered in compliance with rule). DISMISSED. [11381281] (WL) [Entered: 07/30/2019 01:29 PM] |
Filing 2 Filed (ECF) Appellees County of Sacramento, Scott Jones, Eric Buehler, Connor Milligan, Jesse Iniguez, Emily Ball, Ken Lloyd, Madriago, Trummel and Riviera Motion to dismiss the case. Date of service: 07/08/2019. [11356662] [19-16225] (Nathan, Jill) [Entered: 07/08/2019 02:00 PM] |
Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Eric Anthony Alston Jr. opening brief due 08/19/2019. Appellees Emily Ball, Eric Buehler, County of Sacramento, Jesse Iniguez, Scott Jones, Ken Lloyd, Madriago, Connor Milligan, Riviera and Trummel answering brief due 09/16/2019. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11338693] (JPD) [Entered: 06/20/2019 09:37 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.