Timothy Piller v. Andrew Saul
| TIMOTHY AUSTIN PILLER |
| ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security |
| 19-16515 |
| August 1, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 17, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 Filed order (KIM MCLANE WARDLAW, JACQUELINE H. NGUYEN and ANDREW D. HURWITZ) A review of the record and the responses to this courts August 6, 2019 order demonstrates that this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because the July 31, 2019 notice of appeal was not filed within 60 days after the district courts judgment entered on May 31, 2019. See 28 U.S.C. 2107(b); United States v. Sadler, 480 F.3d 932, 937 (9th Cir. 2007) (requirement of timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional). Consequently, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. DISMISSED. [11433900] (JPD) [Entered: 09/17/2019 10:19 AM] |
| Filing 4 Filed (ECF) Appellee Andrew M. Saul reply to response to order to show cause dated 08/06/2019. Date of service: 09/03/2019. [11419639] [19-16515] (Lahey, Sharon) [Entered: 09/03/2019 06:32 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed (ECF) Appellant Timothy Austin Piller response to order to show cause dated 08/06/2019. Date of service: 08/27/2019. [11411453] [19-16515] (Shepherd, Betsy) [Entered: 08/27/2019 09:34 AM] |
| Filing 2 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: LCC): A review of the record suggests that this court may lack jurisdiction over the appeal because the notice of appeal was not filed within 60 days after the district courts judgment entered on May 31, 2019. See 28 U.S.C. 2107(b); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B). Within 21 days after the date of this order, appellant shall move for voluntary dismissal of the appeal or show cause why it should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. If appellant elects to show cause, a response may be filed within 10 days after service of the memorandum. If appellant does not comply with this order, the Clerk shall dismiss this appeal pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 42-1. Briefing is suspended pending further order of the court. [11388129] (AF) [Entered: 08/06/2019 08:59 AM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: Mediation Questionnaire due on 08/08/2019. Appellant Timothy Austin Piller opening brief due 09/30/2019. Appellee Andrew M. Saul, Commissioner of Social Security answering brief due 10/30/2019. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11384627] (RT) [Entered: 08/01/2019 03:28 PM] |
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.
| Search for this case: Timothy Piller v. Andrew Saul | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff / appellant: TIMOTHY AUSTIN PILLER | |
| Represented By: | Shellie Lott |
| Represented By: | Betsy Ruth Shepherd |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant / appellee: ANDREW M. SAUL, Commissioner of Social Security | |
| Represented By: | Benjamin Eli Hall Esquire |
| Represented By: | Sharon Lahey |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
