Misty Harris v. Advanced Care Internal Med., et al
JANE DOE, named as: Jane Doe Wu - wife, ADVANCED CARE INTERNAL MEDICINE PLLC, an Arizona Professional Limited Liability Company and JIANWEN WU, Husband |
MISTY HARRIS |
21-15184 |
February 2, 2021 |
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
Description |
---|
MISTY HARRIS V. ADVANCED CARE INTERNAL MED. |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on March 9, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 11 Filed order (M. SMITH, BADE and BUMATAY) Appellees motion to dismiss (Docket Entry No. [ # 4 ] ) is denied. Appellants opening brief is due April 19, 2021. Appellees answering brief is due May 19, 2021. Appellants optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12029355] --[Edited: Updated docket text to reflect correct filing. 03/11/2021 by TYL] (JPD) [Entered: 03/09/2021 12:06 PM] |
Filing 10 MEDIATION STATUS REPORT DUE - 03/04/2021. See order for details. [12022637] (BLS) [Entered: 03/03/2021 10:14 AM] |
Filing 9 MEDIATION CONFERENCE SCHEDULED - DIAL-IN Assessment Conference, 02/25/2021, 10:00 a.m. PACIFIC Time. The briefing schedule previously set by the court remains in effect. See order for instructions and details. [12001357] (BLS) [Entered: 02/11/2021 04:38 PM] |
Filing 8 Filed (ECF) Appellees Advanced Care Internal Medicine PLLC, Jane Doe and Jianwen Wu reply to response (motion to dismiss the case). Date of service: 02/10/2021. [11999004] [21-15184] (Schwartz, David) [Entered: 02/10/2021 10:35 AM] |
Filing 7 The Mediation Questionnaire for this case was filed on 02/08/2021. 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.[11996055]. [21-15184] (AD) [Entered: 02/08/2021 12:44 PM] |
Filing 6 Filed (ECF) Appellant Misty Harris response to motion ([ # 4 ] Motion (ECF Filing), [ # 4 ] Motion (ECF Filing)). Date of service: 02/08/2021. [11995495] [21-15184] (Bendau, Clifford) [Entered: 02/08/2021 09:31 AM] |
Filing 5 Filed (ECF) Appellant Misty Harris Mediation Questionnaire. Date of service: 02/08/2021. [11995476] [21-15184] (Bendau, Clifford) [Entered: 02/08/2021 09:25 AM] |
Filing 4 Filed (ECF) Appellees Advanced Care Internal Medicine PLLC, Jane Doe and Jianwen Wu Motion to dismiss the case. Date of service: 02/04/2021. [11992511] [21-15184] (Schwartz, David) [Entered: 02/04/2021 09:58 AM] |
Filing 3 Added Attorney(s) David Richard Schwartz for party(s) Appellee Advanced Care Internal Medicine PLLC Appellee Jane Doe Appellee Jianwen Wu, in case 21-15184. [11992307] (NAC) [Entered: 02/04/2021 08:53 AM] |
Filing 2 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of David Richard Schwartz (Udall Shumway) for Appellees Advanced Care Internal Medicine PLLC, Jane Doe and Jianwen Wu. Date of service: 02/04/2021. (Party was previously proceeding with counsel.) [11992294] [21-15184] (Schwartz, David) [Entered: 02/04/2021 08:48 AM] |
Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Misty Harris Mediation Questionnaire due on 02/09/2021. Appellant Misty Harris opening brief due 04/05/2021. Appellees Advanced Care Internal Medicine PLLC, Jane Doe and Jianwen Wu answering brief due 05/05/2021. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11989600] (JBS) [Entered: 02/02/2021 10:54 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.