USA v. Susan Su
| SUSAN XIAO-PING SU, AKA Susan Su |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| 20-16976 |
| October 9, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 23, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 Filed Appellant Susan Xiao-Ping Su Form CJA 23. Paper filing deficiency: None. Served on 11/20/2020. [11904381] (QDL) [Entered: 11/23/2020 08:20 PM] |
| Filing 7 Filed Appellant Susan Xiao-Ping Su motion to proceed In Forma Pauperis. Deficiencies: None. Served on 11/20/2020. [11904380] (QDL) [Entered: 11/23/2020 08:19 PM] |
| Filing 6 Received copy of District Court order filed on 11/09/2020 denying certificate of appealability. [11887271] (QDL) [Entered: 11/09/2020 04:40 PM] |
| Filing 5 Filed Appellant Susan Xiao-Ping Su supplemental motion to appoint counsel. Deficiencies: None. Served on 10/28/2020. [11879368] (QDL) [Entered: 11/02/2020 03:26 PM] |
| Filing 4 Received copy of District Court order filed on 10/23/2020 regarding in forma pauperis status on appeal. [11876938] (QDL) [Entered: 10/30/2020 10:29 AM] |
| Filing 3 Filed Appellant Susan Xiao-Ping Su motion to appoint counsel. Deficiencies: None. Served on 10/23/2020. [11874365] (QDL) [Entered: 10/28/2020 01:25 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed order (Appellate Commissioner): The district court has not issued or declined to issue a certificate of appealability in this appeal, which appears to arise under 28 U.S.C. 2255. See Porter v. Adams, 244 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2001) (certificate of appealability required where 28 U.S.C. 2241 petition attacks conviction or sentence, even if it was not construed as section 2255 motion by district court). Accordingly, this case is remanded to the district court for the limited purpose of granting or denying a certificate of appealability at the courts earliest convenience. See 28 U.S.C. 2253(c); Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); United States v. Asrar, 116 F.3d 1268, 1270 (9th Cir. 1997). If the district court issues a certificate of appealability, the court should specify which issue or issues meet the required showing. See 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(3); Asrar, 116 F.3d at 1270. Under Asrar, if the district court declines to issue a certificate, the court should state its reasons why a certificate of appealability should not be granted, and the Clerk of the district court shall forward to this court the record with the order denying the certificate. See Fed. R. App. P. 22(b)(1); Asrar, 116 F.3d at 1270. The Clerk shall send a copy of this order to the district court judge. (Pro Se) [11869960] (CKP) [Entered: 10/23/2020 12:21 PM] |
| Filing 1 Open 9th Circuit docket. No COA order in district court. Record on appeal included: Yes. [11854064] (OC) [Entered: 10/09/2020 12:01 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: USA v. Susan Su | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant / appellant: SUSAN XIAO-PING SU, AKA Susan Su | |
| Represented By: | Susan Xiao-Ping Su |
| 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 | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff / appellee: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | |
| Represented By: | Merry Jean Chan |
| Represented By: | S. Waqar Hasib |
| 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 | [ 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.
