Shane Love v. Aaron Villacana, et al
| MICHAEL OROSCO, Pasadena PD Officer, individually and in official capacity, ROBERT GRIFFITH, Pasadena PD Officer, individually and in official capacity, CITY OF PASADENA, AARON VILLACANA, Pasadena PD Officer, individually and in official capacity, DOES, 1-10 inclusive, RAFAEL SANTIAGO, Pasadena PD Officer, individually and in official capacity, PEREZ, PPD Chief, individually and in official capacity, PHILLIP SANCHEZ, Former PPD Chief, individually and in official capacity, PHILLIP POIRIER, Pasadena PD Officer, individually and in official capacity and THOMAS BUTLER, Pasadena PD Officer, individually and in official capacity |
| SHANE LOVE |
| 20-56003 |
| September 29, 2020 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
 SHANE LOVE V. AARON VILLACANA, ET AL
|
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 13, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 Filed order MEDIATION (SJS): The briefing schedule previously set by the court is amended as follows: appellant's opening brief is due December 28, 2020; appellees' answering brief is due January 27, 2021; appellant's optional reply brief is due within 21 days from the service date of the answering brief. [11892456] (AF) [Entered: 11/13/2020 01:51 PM] |
| Filing 6 MEDIATION CONFERENCE SCHEDULED - DIAL-IN Assessment Conference, 11/12/2020, 10:00 a.m. PACIFIC Time. The briefing schedule previously set by the court remains in effect. See order for instructions and details. [11878720] (CL) [Entered: 11/02/2020 11:25 AM] |
| Filing 5 MEDIATION ORDER FILED: By 10/30/2020, counsel to email Circuit Mediator regarding settlement potential. Include Ninth Circuit case number in subject line. This communication will be kept confidential, if requested, and should not be filed with the court. The existing briefing schedule remains in effect. SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS. [11862221] (CL) [Entered: 10/16/2020 03:18 PM] |
| Filing 4 The Mediation Questionnaire for this case was filed on 10/14/2020. To submit pertinent confidential information directly to the Circuit Mediators, please use the following # link . Confidential submissions may include any information relevant to mediation of the case and settlement potential, including, but not limited to, settlement history, ongoing or potential settlement discussions, non-litigated party related issues, other pending actions, and timing considerations that may impact mediation efforts.[11859240]. [20-56003] (AD) [Entered: 10/14/2020 06:44 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed (ECF) Appellant Shane Love Mediation Questionnaire. Date of service: 10/14/2020. [11859184] [20-56003] (Harper, Caree) [Entered: 10/14/2020 05:36 PM] |
| Filing 2 MEDIATION ORDER FILED: The court of appeals' records do not indicate that appellant has filed a mediation questionnaire in accordance with Cir. R. 3-4. Within seven (7) days of the filing date of this order, appellant shall file a Mediation Questionnaire or dismiss the appeal voluntarily. [11853053] (LW) [Entered: 10/08/2020 04:10 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Shane Love Mediation Questionnaire due on 10/06/2020. Appellant Shane Love opening brief due 11/25/2020. Appellees Thomas Butler, City of Pasadena, Does, Robert Griffith, Michael Orosco, Perez, Phillip Poirier, Phillip Sanchez, Rafael Santiago and Aaron Villacana answering brief due 12/28/2020. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11840538] (JMR) [Entered: 09/29/2020 10:38 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.
