Nagui Mankaruse v. Raytheon Company, et al
| KIMBERLY R. KERRY, an individual, RICHARD ROCKE, an individual, KEITH PEDEN, an individual, BRIAN ARMSTRONG, WILLIAM H. SWANSON, an individual, DAVID EARL STEPHENS, an individaul, MARK P. HONTZ, an individual, JAMES D. WEBER, an individual, JOHN RYAN, an individual, MATTHEW J. BREWER, RAYTHEON COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, JAMES LEROY COTTERMAN, Jr., F. KINSEY HAFNER, an individual, THOMAS A. KENNEDY, an individual, COLIN J. SCHOTTLAENDER, an individual, TRS LLC US, a Delaware limited liability company and DOES, 1 through 10, inclusive |
| NAGUI MANKARUSE |
| 20-55192 |
| February 24, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 5, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 Filed Appellant Nagui Mankaruse motion to proceed In Forma Pauperis. Deficiencies: None. [11619627] (NAC) [Entered: 03/05/2020 02:37 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Nagui Mankaruse opening brief due 04/27/2020. Appellees Brian Armstrong, Matthew J. Brewer, James Leroy Cotterman Jr., Does, F. Kinsey Hafner, Mark P. Hontz, Thomas A. Kennedy, Kimberly R. Kerry, Keith Peden, Raytheon Company, Richard Rocke, John Ryan, Colin J. Schottlaender, David Earl Stephens, William H. Swanson, TRS LLC US and James D. Weber answering brief due 05/27/2020. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11606497] (RT) [Entered: 02/24/2020 11:51 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.
