Shaykh Muhammad Al Saud v. Paul Penzone, et al
| PAUL PENZONE, DAVID SHINN, Director and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA |
| SHAYKH MUHAMMAD ABDUL BIN TALAL AL SAUD, AKA Shaykh Muhammad Abdul Aziz Khalid Bin Talal Alsaud |
| 20-17258 |
| November 17, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 21, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Filed order (SUSAN P. GRABER and RICHARD C. TALLMAN) Appellants motion for reconsideration (Docket Entry No. [ # 3 ]) is denied. See 9th Cir. R. 27-10. No further filings will be entertained in this closed case. [12082191] (OC) [Entered: 04/21/2021 11:52 AM] |
| Filing 3 Filed Appellant Shaykh Muhammad Abdul Bin Talal Al Saud motion to reconsider Panel order of the Court filed on 03/05/2021. Deficiencies: None. [12073679] (RR) [Entered: 04/14/2021 10:04 AM] |
| Filing 2 Filed order (WILLIAM C. CANBY and LAWRENCE VANDYKE) The request for a certificate of appealability is denied because appellant has not shown that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see also 28 U.S.C. 2253(c)(2); Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 140-41 (2012). Any pending motions are denied as moot. DENIED. [12025954] (OC) [Entered: 03/05/2021 12:20 PM] |
| Filing 1 Open 9th Circuit docket: needs certificate of appealability. Date COA denied in DC: 11/03/2020. Record on appeal included: Yes. [11896571] (OC) [Entered: 11/17/2020 04:29 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.
