M.A. Mobile Ltd., et al v. Indian Institute of Technology, et al
| MANDANA D. FARHANG |
| PRAVANJAN CHOUDHURY, PARTHA P. CHAKRABARTI, PALLAB DASGUPTA, RAKESH GUPTA, GURASHISH S. BRAR, ANIMESH NASKAS, SUBRAT PANDA and TECHNOLOGY INCUBATION AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP TRAINING SOCIETY, an Indian society |
| SANJIV NAND SINGH, Counsel Filing Motion to Withdraw on Behalf of Self and Firm |
| INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, KHARAGPUR, an Indian Institute of Technology incorporated under the "Institutes of Technology, Act 1961" |
| M.A. MOBILE LTD. |
| 20-15177 |
| February 7, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 25, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 16 Filed order (A. WALLACE TASHIMA, MICHELLE T. FRIEDLAND and ERIC D. MILLER) A review of the record and the responses to this courts February 13, 2020 order demonstrates that the questions raised in this appeal are so insubstantial as not to justify further proceedings. See 9th Cir. R. 3-6(a)(2); United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir. 1982) (stating standard). Accordingly, we summarily affirm the district courts January 13, 2020 order denying appellants January 11, 2020 motion for leave to file a motion to reconsider the district courts December 4, 2019 post-judgment order. Appellants motions to consolidate this appeal with appeal No. 19-16974 and to extend the time to file a reply in support of the motion to consolidate are denied as moot. AFFIRMED. [11642044] (JMR) [Entered: 03/25/2020 04:26 PM] |
| Filing 15 Filed (ECF) Appellant M.A. Mobile Ltd. reply to response to order to show cause dated 02/13/2020. Date of service: 03/20/2020. [11637487] [20-15177] (Ray, John) [Entered: 03/20/2020 07:07 PM] |
| Filing 14 Filed (ECF) Appellee Sanjiv Nand Singh reply to response to order to show cause dated 03/16/2020. Date of service: 03/16/2020. [11631666] [20-15177] (Tanimasa, Christopher) [Entered: 03/16/2020 04:38 PM] |
| Filing 13 Added Attorney(s) Christopher A. Tanimasa for party(s) Appellee Sanjiv Nand Singh, in case 20-15177. [11631646] (QDL) [Entered: 03/16/2020 04:29 PM] |
| Filing 12 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Christopher Aaron Tanimasa (Galloway, Lucchese, Everson & Picchi 2300 Contra Costa Blvd., Suite 350 Pleasant Hill, CA 94523) for Appellee Sanjiv Nand Singh. Date of service: 03/16/2020. (Party was previously proceeding pro se.) [11631637] [20-15177] (Tanimasa, Christopher) [Entered: 03/16/2020 04:27 PM] |
| Filing 11 Filed (ECF) Appellee Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur reply to response to order to show cause dated 02/13/2020. Date of service: 03/13/2020. [11629809] [20-15177] (Chatterjee, Indra) [Entered: 03/13/2020 03:18 PM] |
| Filing 10 Filed (ECF) Appellant M.A. Mobile Ltd. response to order to show cause dated 02/13/2020. Date of service: 03/05/2020. [11620123] [20-15177] (Ray, John) [Entered: 03/05/2020 08:42 PM] |
| Filing 9 Filed (ECF) Appellant M.A. Mobile Ltd. Motion to extend time to file a reply until 03/03/2020. Date of service: 03/05/2020. [11619554] [20-15177] (Ray, John) [Entered: 03/05/2020 01:58 PM] |
| Filing 8 Filed (ECF) Appellant M.A. Mobile Ltd. reply to response (). Date of service: 03/03/2020. [11617269] [20-15177] (Ray, John) [Entered: 03/03/2020 09:53 PM] |
| Filing 7 Filed (ECF) Appellee Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur response opposing motion ([ # 5 ] Motion (ECF Filing), [ # 5 ] Motion (ECF Filing)). Date of service: 02/24/2020. [11606633] [20-15177] (Chatterjee, Indra) [Entered: 02/24/2020 01:00 PM] |
| Filing 6 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: LCC): The notice of appeal filed February 6, 2020 indicates appellants intent to appeal the district courts December 4, 2019 post-judgment order. Appellant did not file a notice of appeal within the 30-day jurisdictional time period. See 28 U.S.C. 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). Nor did appellant timely file one of the motions that could have tolled the time within which to file a notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4). Instead, on January 11, 2020, appellant filed a motion for leave to file a motion to reconsider the district courts December 4, 2019 order, which the district court denied on January 13, 2020. Because the February 6, 2020 notice of appeal was not filed within 30 days after the challenged December 4, 2019 order, it appears that the courts jurisdiction in this appeal is limited to review of the district courts January 13, 2020 order denying appellants motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration. This appeal may therefore be appropriate for summary disposition under Ninth Circuit Rule 3-6(b) because the questions on which the decision in the appeal depends may be so insubstantial as not to justify further proceedings. See 9th Cir. R. 3-6; United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir. 1982). Within 21 days after the date of this order, appellant shall show cause why summary affirmance of the district courts January 13, 2020 order is not appropriate. A response may be filed within 10 days after service of the memorandum. If appellant does not comply with this order, this appeal will be automatically dismissed by the Clerk for failure to prosecute. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. The briefing schedule is stayed pending further order of the court. [11597273] (JMR) [Entered: 02/13/2020 04:49 PM] |
| Filing 5 Filed (ECF) Appellant M.A. Mobile Ltd. Motion to consolidate cases 19-16974, 2015177. Date of service: 02/12/2020. [11594420] [20-15177] (Ray, John) [Entered: 02/12/2020 09:46 AM] |
| Filing 4 Attorney William Mark Balin in 20-15177 substituted by Attorney John H. Ray III in 20-15177 [11594289] (QDL) [Entered: 02/12/2020 09:01 AM] |
| Filing 3 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of John H. Ray, III (Ray & Counsel, P.C., 10044 South Leavitt Street, Chicago, IL 60643) for Appellant M.A. Mobile Ltd.. Substitution for Attorney Mr. William Mark Balin, Esquire for Appellant M.A. Mobile Ltd.. Date of service: 02/11/2020. (Party was previously proceeding with counsel.) [11594152] [20-15177] (Ray, John) [Entered: 02/11/2020 07:08 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed (ECF) Appellant M.A. Mobile Ltd. corporate disclosure statement. Date of service: 02/11/2020. [11594150] [20-15177] (Ray, John) [Entered: 02/11/2020 07:01 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant M.A. Mobile Ltd. Mediation Questionnaire due on 02/14/2020. Transcript ordered by 03/09/2020. Transcript due 04/07/2020. Appellant M.A. Mobile Ltd. opening brief due 05/18/2020. Appellees Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur and Sanjiv Nand Singh answering brief due 06/18/2020. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11590383] (RT) [Entered: 02/07/2020 04:57 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.
