Carrie Clark v. City of Tucson
| CARRIE FERRARA CLARK |
| CITY OF TUCSON |
| 20-15982 |
| May 21, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 22, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 Filed order (Deputy Clerk: RGA) The conference previously scheduled for July 1, 2020, is canceled. Appellants motion to dismiss this appeal (Docket Entry No. [ # 7 ] ) is granted. Fed. R. App. P. 42(b). A copy of this order shall serve as and for the mandate of this court. [11729599] (JPD) [Entered: 06/22/2020 03:07 PM] |
| Filing 7 Filed (ECF) Appellant Carrie Ferrara Clark Unopposed Motion to dismiss case voluntarily pursuant to FRAP 42(b). Date of service: 06/18/2020. [11726584] [20-15982] (Jacobson, Jeffrey) [Entered: 06/18/2020 03:32 PM] |
| Filing 6 MEDIATION CONFERENCE SCHEDULED - DIAL-IN AssessmentConference, 07/01/2020, 2:00 p.m., PACIFIC Time. See order for instructions and details. [11721707] (VS) [Entered: 06/15/2020 12:38 PM] |
| Filing 5 The Mediation Questionnaire for this case was filed on 05/28/2020. To submit pertinent confidential information directly to the Circuit Mediators, please use the following # link . Confidential submissions may include any information relevant to mediation of the case and settlement potential, including, but not limited to, settlement history, ongoing or potential settlement discussions, non-litigated party related issues, other pending actions, and timing considerations that may impact mediation efforts.[11704554]. [20-15982] (AD) [Entered: 05/28/2020 06:44 PM] |
| Filing 4 MEDIATION ORDER FILED: By 06/12/2020, counsel to email Circuit Mediator regarding settlement potential. Include Ninth Circuit case number in subject line. This communication will be kept confidential, if requested, and should not be filed with the court. SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS. [11704423] (VS) [Entered: 05/28/2020 04:34 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed (ECF) Appellant Carrie Ferrara Clark Mediation Questionnaire. Date of service: 05/28/2020. [11704335] [20-15982] (Jacobson, Jeffrey) [Entered: 05/28/2020 03:41 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: SM): The notice of appeal filed May 19, 2020 indicates appellants intent to appeal the district courts April 25, 2018 and February 26, 2020 orders. A review of the record suggests that this court may lack jurisdiction over this appeal because the notice of appeal was not filed within 30 days after the challenged February 26, 2020 order, and appellants May 8, 2020 motion to amend the judgment did not toll the time within which to file a notice of appeal. See 28 U.S.C. 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), 4(a)(4). Within 21 days after the date of this order, appellant shall move for voluntary dismissal of the appeal or show cause why it should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. If appellant elects to show cause, a response may be filed within 10 days after service of the memorandum. If appellant does not comply with this order, the Clerk shall dismiss this appeal pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 42-1. Briefing is suspended pending further order of the court. [11704077] (JPD) [Entered: 05/28/2020 02:29 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Carrie Ferrara Clark Mediation Questionnaire due on 05/28/2020. Transcript ordered by 06/18/2020. Transcript due 07/20/2020. Appellant Carrie Ferrara Clark opening brief due 08/27/2020. Appellee City of Tucson answering brief due 09/28/2020. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11697769] (JBS) [Entered: 05/21/2020 10:58 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.
