Peter Pototsky v. City of Nogales, et al
| KEITH BARTH, DOES, named as Spouse of Keith D. Barth; named as Spouse of Michele Cardillo, SCARLETT BUNTING, CITY OF NOGALES, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS and MICHELLE CARDILLO |
| PETER POTOTSKY |
| 20-15927 |
| May 15, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 12, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 MANDATE ISSUED. (BGS, JHN and DPC) [11719938] (RR) [Entered: 06/12/2020 10:25 AM] |
| Filing 3 Filed order (BARRY G. SILVERMAN, JACQUELINE H. NGUYEN and DANIEL PAUL COLLINS) A review of the record demonstrates that this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because the orders challenged in the appeal are not final or appealable. See 28 U.S.C. 1291; WMX Techs., Inc. v. Miller, 104 F.3d 1133, 1136 (9th Cir. 1997) (en banc) (dismissal of complaint with leave to amend is not appealable); United States v. Washington, 573 F.2d 1121, 1122 (9th Cir. 1978) (order denying motion to disqualify judge is not final or appealable). Consequently, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. All pending motions are denied as moot. DISMISSED. [11698177] (WL) [Entered: 05/21/2020 02:37 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed Appellant Peter Pototsky motion to stay lower court action. Deficiencies: None. Served on 05/13/2020. [11691846] (JBS) [Entered: 05/15/2020 09:30 AM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCE OF PRO SE APPELLANT AND NO APPEARANCE FOR APPELLEES. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Peter Pototsky opening brief due 07/13/2020. [11691832] (JBS) [Entered: 05/15/2020 09:26 AM] |
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.
