Lester Riter, et al v. Richard Wacker, et al
Defendant / Appellee: SUMMER OKADA, DOES, John Does 1-50; Jane Does 1-50 ; Doe Partnerships 1-50 ; Doe Corporations 1-50 ; Doe Entities 1-50; Doe Governmental Units 1-50, GERALDINE K. CHEPLIC, American Mutual Group, RICHARD F. WACKER, CEO of American Savings Bank, MARVIN S.C. DANG, LLLC, ALAN H. TUHY and CONSTANCE LAU, Chairman of American Savings Bank
Plaintiff / Appellant: LESTER EUGENE RITER and TERESA MARIE ALTMAN
Case Number: 20-15290
Filed: February 21, 2020
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 10, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 10, 2020 Filing 4 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: MN): A review of the record reflects that this appeal may be frivolous. 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, appellants 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 appellants do 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 appellants file a motion to dismiss the appeal, the Clerk will dismiss this appeal, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b). If appellants submit 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 appellants file a statement that the appeal should go forward, appellees may file a response within 10 days after service of appellants statement. The briefing schedule for this appeal remains stayed. The Clerk shall serve on appellants: (1) a form motion to voluntarily dismiss the appeal, and (2) a form statement that the appeal should go forward. Appellants may use the enclosed forms for any motion to dismiss this appeal or statement that the appeal should go forward. [11657468] (AF) [Entered: 04/10/2020 11:54 AM]
April 7, 2020 Filing 3 Filed Appellants Teresa Marie Altman and Lester Eugene Riter motion to proceed In Forma Pauperis. Deficiencies: None. [11653898] (NAC) [Entered: 04/07/2020 11:19 AM]
March 13, 2020 Filing 2 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: CO): A review of the district court record reflects that appellants did not sign the notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 3(c)(2) (notice of appeal considered filed on behalf of the signer); see also Becker v. Montgomery, 532 U.S. 757, 765 (2001) (pro se litigants failure to sign the notice of appeal is a nonjurisdictional, and therefore, curable defect); McKinney v. Debord, 507 F.2d 501 (9th Cir. 1974) (pro se appellant must personally sign notice of appeal). Within 21 days after the date of this order, appellants shall correct the defect by filing a signed copy of the notice of appeal in the district court. A review of the district court docket also reflects that appellants have not paid the docketing and filing fees for this appeal. Within 21 days after the date of this order, appellants shall either: (1) file motions with this court to proceed in forma pauperis accompanied by completed and signed Form 4 affidavits; or (2) pay $505.00 to the district court as the docketing and filing fees for this appeal and provide proof of payment to this court. The Clerk shall serve a Form 4 financial affidavit on appellants. The filing of a motion to proceed in forma pauperis will automatically stay the briefing schedule under Ninth Circuit Rule 27-11. If appellants fails to comply with this order, the appeal will be dismissed automatically by the Clerk under Ninth Circuit Rule 42-1. [11630192] (RT) [Entered: 03/13/2020 04:59 PM]
February 21, 2020 Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANTS. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellants Teresa Marie Altman and Lester Eugene Riter opening brief due 04/22/2020. Appellees Geraldine K. Cheplic, Does, Constance Lau, Marvin S.C. Dang, LLLC, Summer Okada, Alan H. Tuhy and Richard F. Wacker answering brief due 05/22/2020. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11605461] (RT) [Entered: 02/21/2020 05:15 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: Lester Riter, et al v. Richard Wacker, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant / appellee: SUMMER OKADA
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: DOES, John Does 1-50; Jane Does 1-50 ; Doe Partnerships 1-50 ; Doe Corporations 1-50 ; Doe Entities 1-50; Doe Governmental Units 1-50
Represented By: Michael Richard Vieira Esquire
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: GERALDINE K. CHEPLIC, American Mutual Group
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: RICHARD F. WACKER, CEO of American Savings Bank
Represented By: Michael Richard Vieira Esquire
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: MARVIN S.C. DANG, LLLC
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: ALAN H. TUHY
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: CONSTANCE LAU, Chairman of American Savings Bank
Represented By: Michael Richard Vieira Esquire
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: LESTER EUGENE RITER
Represented By: Lester Eugene Riter
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: TERESA MARIE ALTMAN
Represented By: Teresa Marie Altman
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.


Why Is My Information Online?