Charles Branham v. State of Montana, et al
| JIM SALMONSEN |
| STATE OF MONTANA and PATRICK MCTIGHE |
| CHARLES IVAN BRANHAM |
| 19-35829 |
| September 30, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 22, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 Streamlined request [4] by Appellant Charles Ivan Branham to extend time to file the brief is approved. Amended briefing schedule: Appellant Charles Ivan Branham opening brief due 12/30/2019. Appellees Patrick McTighe and State of Montana answering brief due 01/29/2020. The optional reply brief is due 21 days from the date of service of the answering brief. [11508363] (BG) [Entered: 11/22/2019 08:59 AM] |
| Filing 4 Filed (ECF) Streamlined request for extension of time to file Opening Brief by Appellant Charles Ivan Branham. New requested due date is 12/30/2019. [11507209] [19-35829] (Hoovestal, Palmer) [Entered: 11/21/2019 12:38 PM] |
| Filing 3 Fee status changed ( [Case Number 19-35829: IFP] ). [11469325] (RT) [Entered: 10/18/2019 09:59 AM] |
| Filing 2 Received copy of District Court order filed on 10/15/2019. granting Motion to Appoint Counsel ; granting Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis [11464449] (NAC) [Entered: 10/15/2019 02:25 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Charles Ivan Branham opening brief due 11/29/2019. Appellees Patrick McTighe and State of Montana answering brief due 12/30/2019. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11448863] (RT) [Entered: 09/30/2019 02:31 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.
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.
