Robert Stoddard v. Kate Brown, et al
| MARK NOOTH, East-Side Administrator, C. SNYDER, E.O.C.I. C/O. Officer, SUSAN WASHBURN, E.O.C.I. Superintendent, T. STEWART, E.O.C.I. Captain, COLETTE PETERS, Director of D.O.C. and KATE BROWN, Governor |
| ROBERT STODDARD |
| 20-36040 |
| December 1, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 29, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 16 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: CO): The court has received and reviewed appellants response to this courts December 3, 2020 order to show cause. Appellant attests that he delivered the notice of appeal to prison authorities on June 11, 2020, within 30 days after entry of the district courts judgment. See 28 U.S.C. 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), (c)(1). Accordingly, the order to show cause is discharged. Briefing is stayed pending resolution of appellants motions to proceed in forma pauperis and for appointment of counsel. See 9th Cir. R. 27-11. [11986354] (CKP) [Entered: 01/29/2021 02:08 PM] |
Filing 15
Received copy of District Court order filed ORDER: An appeal of the Order and Judgment dismissing this action is frivolous or not taken in good faith, and plaintiff's IFP status is revoked. Ordered by Judge Ann L. Aiken. (Deposited in outgoing mail to pro se party on 1/29/2021.) (ck) [11986350] (JFF) [Entered: 01/29/2021 02:06 PM]
|
| Filing 14 Filed Appellant Robert Stoddard letter dated re: Form 29. Request for Docket Sheet, Document, or Rules. Paper filing deficiency: None. [11985839] (JFF) [Entered: 01/29/2021 10:20 AM] |
| Filing 13 Received original and 7 copies of Appellant Robert Stoddard opening brief of 7 pages (Informal: Yes). Served on 01/21/2021. Major deficiency: briefing is stayed. [11984998] (LA) [Entered: 01/28/2021 02:35 PM] |
| Filing 12 Filed referral notice (Deputy Clerk:CKP): Referring to the district court for determination whether in forma pauperis status should continue for this appeal. [11984698] (CKP) [Entered: 01/28/2021 12:35 PM] |
| Filing 11 Filed Appellant Robert Stoddard letter dated re: Declaration. Paper filing deficiency: None. [11981364] (JFF) [Entered: 01/26/2021 09:59 AM] |
| Filing 10 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: CO): A review of the docket reflects that, although appellant has filed several motions, he has failed to respond to the court's December 3, 2020 order to show cause. Within 21 days after the date of this order, appellant shall file a response to the December 3, 2020 order to show cause. If appellant fails to comply with this order, the appeal will be dismissed by the Clerk for failure to prosecute. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. Briefing is stayed pending further order of the court. The Clerk shall send a copy of the December 3, 2020 order to appellant along with this order. [11955300] (CKP) [Entered: 01/07/2021 09:24 AM] |
| Filing 9 Filed Appellant Robert Stoddard affidavit in support of motion for appointment of pro bono counsel. Dated 12/18/2020. Paper filing deficiency: None. [11944931] (RL) [Entered: 12/24/2020 11:28 AM] |
| Filing 8 Filed Appellant Robert Stoddard FORM 14 motion for extension of time. Deficiencies: None. Served on 12/18/2020. [11944929] (RL) [Entered: 12/24/2020 11:25 AM] |
| Filing 7 Streamlined request by Appellant Robert Stoddard to extend time to file the brief is not approved because it is unnecessary. The briefing schedule is stayed. See 9th Cir. R. 27-11. [11944918] (JN) [Entered: 12/24/2020 11:14 AM] |
| Filing 6 Deleted Incorrect Entry (Document will be refiled in Case No. 20-36046). [11936671] (JFF) [Entered: 12/22/2020 11:19 AM] |
| Filing 5 Filed Appellant Robert Stoddard motion to appoint counsel. Deficiencies: None. [11936660] (JFF) [Entered: 12/22/2020 11:11 AM] |
| Filing 4 Filed Appellant Robert Stoddard motion to proceed In Forma Pauperis. Deficiencies: None. [11936655] (JFF) [Entered: 12/22/2020 11:09 AM] |
| Filing 3 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: CO): The district court judgment was entered on the docket on May 21, 2020. Appellants notice of appeal from that judgment was dated June 11, 2020, but was not filed until December 1, 2020. Thus, the notice of appeal was not filed within 30 days after the entry of the judgment. See 28 U.S.C 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). Because appellant is a pro se prisoner, however, the notice of appeal is deemed filed when it was delivered to prison authorities for forwarding to the court. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 270 (1988). Accordingly, within 21 days after the date of this order, appellant shall file with this court a declaration or notarized statement attesting to the date on which the notice of appeal was deposited in the institutions internal mail system and whether first-class postage was prepaid, or otherwise show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Douglas v. Noelle, 567 F.3d 1103 (9th Cir. 2009). 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 this court. The Clerk will serve a Form 33 Inmate Declaration of Timely Filing on appellant along with this order. [11914097] (CKP) [Entered: 12/03/2020 01:13 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed Appellant Robert Stoddard motion to appoint pro bono counsel. Deficiencies: None. Served on 11/19/2020. [11911352] (JBS) [Entered: 12/01/2020 02:43 PM] |
| 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 Robert Stoddard opening brief due 02/01/2021. [11911341] (JBS) [Entered: 12/01/2020 02:40 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.
