John Melnik v. James Dzurenda, et al
| STACEY BARRETT, JAMES DZURENDA, ANTHONY WARREN, c/o, JASON SATTERLY, c/o, JAY BARTH, Sgt. and DWIGHT NEVEN, Warden |
| JOHN MELNIK |
| 20-15378 |
| March 5, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 17, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: KD): Pursuant to this courts April 3, 2020 order, Samuel D. Weiss, Esq., is hereby appointed to represent appellee for purposes of this appeal only. The clerk will amend the docket to reflect Samuel D. Weiss, Esq., as pro bono counsel of record for appellee. Within 30 days after the date of this order, appellants shall, and appellee may, complete and submit the Ninth Circuit Mediation Questionnaire. See 9th Cir. R. 3-4. The Clerk shall transmit the Mediation Questionnaire to counsel with this order. Counsel shall return it according to the instructions contained in the Mediation Questionnaire. Briefing shall proceed as follows: the opening brief is due June 16, 2020; the answering brief is due July 16, 2020; and the optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11663942] (JMR) [Entered: 04/17/2020 09:24 AM] |
| Filing 6 Filed order (Appellate Commissioner): Upon review of the record, this court has determined that the appointment of pro bono counsel for appellee in this appeal would benefit the courts review. The court by this order expresses no opinion as to the merits of this appeal. The Clerk shall enter an order appointing pro bono counsel to represent appellee for purposes of this appeal only, and establishing a revised briefing schedule. The appeal is stayed pending further order of this court. If appellee objects to the courts appointment of counsel in this appeal, appellee shall file a written objection within 14 days after the filing date of this order. (Pro Se) [11651352] (JMR) [Entered: 04/03/2020 02:21 PM] |
| Filing 5 Added Attorney(s) Samuel Weiss for party(s) Appellee John Melnik, in case 20-15378. [11650856] (QDL) [Entered: 04/03/2020 10:09 AM] |
| Filing 4 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Samuel D. Weiss (Rights Behind Bars, 416 Florida Avenue NW #26152, Washington DC 20001) for Appellee John Melnik. Date of service: 04/03/2020. (Party was previously proceeding pro se.) [11650843] [20-15378] (Weiss, Samuel) [Entered: 04/03/2020 10:01 AM] |
| Filing 3 Attorney Austin T. Barnum in 20-15378 substituted by Attorney Frank Anthony Toddre II in 20-15378 [11629533] (QDL) [Entered: 03/13/2020 02:04 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Frank A. Toddre (State of Nevada, Office of the Attorney General, 555 E. Washington Ave., Ste. 3900, Las Vegas, Nevada 89101) for Appellants Stacey Barrett, Jay Barth, James Dzurenda, Dwight Neven, Jason Satterly and Anthony Warren. Substitution for Attorney Austin T. Barnum for Appellants Stacey Barrett, Jay Barth, James Dzurenda, Dwight Neven, Jason Satterly and Anthony Warren. Date of service: 03/13/2020. (Party was previously proceeding with counsel.) [11629486] [20-15378] (Toddre, Frank) [Entered: 03/13/2020 01:46 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellants Stacey Barrett, Jay Barth, James Dzurenda, Dwight Neven, Warden, Jason Satterly and Anthony Warren opening brief due 05/04/2020. Appellee John Melnik answering brief due 06/02/2020. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11619984] (JPD) [Entered: 03/05/2020 04:27 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.
