Keith Thomas v. Matthew Atchley, et al
| MATTHEW CATE, Secretary of the CDCR and ANTHONY HEDGPETH, Warden |
| MATTHEW ATCHLEY, Acting Warden of Salinas Valley State Prison-listed as John Doe, JEFFREY A. BEARD, LAURA E. DUFFY and KAMALA D. HARRIS, Attorney General |
| KEITH THOMAS |
| 19-56384 |
| November 26, 2019 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 17, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 Filed order (SIDNEY R. THOMAS, MARSHA S. BERZON and DANIEL A. BRESS) This court has reviewed the notice of appeal filed November 21, 2019 in the above-referenced district court docket pursuant to the pre-filing review order entered in docket No. 01-80091. Because this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal, it shall not be permitted to proceed. The notice of appeal, served on November 18, 2019 and filed on November 21, 2019, was not filed or delivered to prison officials within 30 days after the district courts judgment entered on October 20, 2015, and the district court docket reflects that the district court has not entered any post-judgment orders in district court case No. 3:11-cv-01488- AJB-KSC. See 28 U.S.C. 1291, 2107(a); United States v. Sadler, 480 F.3d 932, 937 (9th Cir. 2007) (requirement of timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional); see also In re Thomas, 508 F.3d 1225 (9th Cir. 2007). Appeal No. 19-56384 is therefore dismissed. This order, served on the district court for the Southern District of California, shall constitute the mandate of this court. No motions for reconsideration, rehearing, clarification, stay of the mandate, or any other submissions shall be filed or entertained. DISMISSED. [11535192] (HC) [Entered: 12/17/2019 11:49 AM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. This appeal is subject to a pre-filing review order in case number 01-80091. The appeal will be reviewed by the Court to determine whether it will be allowed to proceed. No briefing schedule will be set until/unless the Court determines that the appeal should be allowed to proceed. [11513160] (HC) [Entered: 11/26/2019 12:31 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.
