James Knochel, et al v. Amy Fackrell, et al
| EMILY NOELLE MIHAYLO |
| UNKOWN PARTY, named as Medical Director - West Yavapai Guidance Clinic, ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA, JOHN C. MORRIS and AMY FACKRELL |
| JAMES JOSEPH KNOCHEL |
| 20-17326 |
| November 30, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Habeas Corpus |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 21, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
Received letter from the Supreme Court dated 03/16/2022, #21A512. The application for an extension of time within which to file a petition for a writ of certiorari in the above-entitled case has been presented to Justice Kagan, who on March 16, 2022, extended the time to and including May 19, 2022. [12401837] (RR) [Entered: 03/22/2022 01:55 PM]
|
|
Filing 12
MANDATE ISSUED. (JCW, RRC and ADH) [12336960] (JFF) [Entered: 01/11/2022 08:54 AM]
|
|
Filing 11
Received copy of motion filed in Supreme Court of the United States re:. Motion filed by Appellant Mr. James Joseph Knochel. [12332682] (RR) [Entered: 01/05/2022 05:38 PM]
|
|
Filing 10
FILED MEMORANDUM (J. CLIFFORD WALLACE, RICHARD R. CLIFTON and ANDREW D. HURWITZ) AFFIRMED. FILED AND ENTERED JUDGMENT. [12320180] (MM) [Entered: 12/20/2021 09:41 AM]
|
|
Filing 9
Received 6 paper copies of Opening Brief [ # 7 ] filed by Mr. James Joseph Knochel. [12233823] (SD) [Entered: 09/20/2021 04:18 PM]
|
|
Filing 8
Filed clerk order: The opening brief [ # 7 ] submitted by Mr. James Joseph Knochel is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 6 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification (attached to the end of each copy of the brief) that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: not applicable. The paper copies shall be submitted to the principal office of the Clerk. [12227715] (LA) [Entered: 09/14/2021 11:17 AM]
|
|
Filing 7
Submitted (ECF) Opening Brief for review. Submitted by Appellant Mr. James Joseph Knochel. Date of service: 09/13/2021. [12226580] [20-17326] (Knochel, James) [Entered: 09/13/2021 11:56 AM]
|
|
Filing 6
Streamlined request [5] by Appellant Mr. James Joseph Knochel to extend time to file the brief is approved. Amended briefing schedule: Appellant James Joseph Knochel opening brief due 09/13/2021. [12184415] (BG) [Entered: 07/27/2021 02:21 PM]
|
|
Filing 5
Filed (ECF) Streamlined request for extension of time to file Opening Brief by Appellant Mr. James Joseph Knochel. New requested due date is 09/10/2021. [12184321] [20-17326] (Knochel, James) [Entered: 07/27/2021 01:38 PM]
|
|
Filing 4
Filed order (Appellate Commissioner): Appellants motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket Entry No. [ # 3 ]) is granted. The Clerk will amend the docket to reflect this status. A certificate of appealability is not required because appellant seeks review only of the district courts November 13, 2020, vexatious litigant order. Appellants opening brief is due August 13, 2021. Appellees have not appeared, so briefing will be complete upon filing of the opening brief. [12155020] (WL) [Entered: 06/25/2021 03:02 PM]
|
| Filing 3 Filed (ECF) Appellant Mr. James Joseph Knochel Motion to proceed In Forma Pauperis. Date of service: 12/02/2020. [11913262] [20-17326] (Knochel, James) [Entered: 12/02/2020 07:29 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: CKP): Order to show cause docket fee due [11910656] (CKP) [Entered: 12/01/2020 10:25 AM] |
| Filing 1 Open 9th Circuit docket. No COA order in district court. Record on appeal included: Yes. [11909026] (JMR) [Entered: 11/30/2020 11:07 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.
