Jordan Venable v. Jesus Acosta
| JESUS ACOSTA |
| JORDAN DUKE VENABLE |
| 20-15031 |
| January 8, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 6, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 Filed order (MARY H. MURGUIA, MORGAN B. CHRISTEN and BRIDGET S. BADE): The district court certified that this appeal is not taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(a). On January 9, 2020, this court ordered appellant to explain in writing why this appeal should not be dismissed as frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2) (court shall dismiss case at any time, if court determines it is frivolous or malicious). Upon a review of the record and the opening brief received January 21, 2020, we conclude this appeal is frivolous. We therefore deny appellants motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket Entry No. [ # 3 ]) and dismiss this appeal as frivolous, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2). All other pending motions are denied as moot. DISMISSED. [11621446] (AF) [Entered: 03/06/2020 03:43 PM] |
| Filing 5 Filed Appellant Jordan Duke Venable motion for clarification of court's order filed 1/9/20 . Deficiencies: None. Served on. [11578760] (RR) [Entered: 01/29/2020 03:59 PM] |
| Filing 4 Received original and 0 copies of Appellant Jordan Duke Venable brief (Informal: Yes) 6 pages. . Served on 01/14/2020. Major deficiencies: IFP motion pending. [11572251] (KT) [Entered: 01/23/2020 03:05 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed Appellant Jordan Duke Venable motion to proceed In Forma Pauperis. Deficiencies: None. [11569773] (NAC) [Entered: 01/22/2020 10:17 AM] |
| Filing 2 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: JW): A review of the district courts docket reflects that the district court has certified that this appeal is not taken in good faith and has revoked appellants in forma pauperis status. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(a). This court may dismiss a case at any time, if the court determines the case is frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2). Within 35 days after the date of this order, appellant must: (1) file a motion to dismiss this appeal, see Fed. R. App. P. 42(b), or (2) file a statement explaining why the appeal is not frivolous and should go forward. If appellant files a statement that the appeal should go forward, appellant also must: (1) file in this court a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, OR (2) pay to the district court $505.00 for the filing and docketing fees for this appeal AND file in this court proof that the $505.00 was paid. If appellant does not respond to this order, the Clerk will dismiss this appeal for failure to prosecute, without further notice. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. If appellant files a motion to dismiss the appeal, the Clerk will dismiss this appeal, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b). If appellant submits any response to this order other than a motion to dismiss the appeal, the court may dismiss this appeal as frivolous, without further notice. If the court dismisses the appeal as frivolous, this appeal may be counted as a strike under 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). The briefing schedule for this appeal is stayed. The Clerk shall serve on appellant: (1) a form motion to voluntarily dismiss the appeal, (2) a form statement that the appeal should go forward, and (3) a Form 4 financial affidavit. Appellant may use the enclosed forms for any motion to dismiss the appeal, statement that the appeal should go forward, and/or motion to proceed in forma pauperis. [11556804] (CKP) [Entered: 01/09/2020 01:55 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCE OF PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Jordan Duke Venable opening brief due 03/02/2020. (No appearance for Appellee, no answering brief deadline set) [11555053] (HC) [Entered: 01/08/2020 12:03 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: Jordan Venable v. Jesus Acosta | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant / appellee: JESUS ACOSTA | |
| 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 ] |
| Plaintiff / appellant: JORDAN DUKE VENABLE | |
| Represented By: | Jordan Duke Venable |
| 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.
