Emelio Osorio-Rosas v. David Shinn, et al
Petitioner / Appellant: EMELIO OSORIO-ROSAS
Respondent / Appellee: DAVID SHINN, Director, ADOC and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Case Number: 21-15300
Filed: February 19, 2021
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on April 12, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
April 12, 2021 Filing 8 Filed letter dated 04/12/2021 re: addendum to de 7. Paper filing deficiency: None. [12072308] (DJV) [Entered: 04/13/2021 10:31 AM]
April 12, 2021 Filing 7 Filed Appellant Emelio Osorio-Rosas response to order to show cause of 03/12/21. Served on 04/12/2021. [12072267] (DJV) [Entered: 04/13/2021 10:16 AM]
March 30, 2021 Filing 6 Filed Appellant Emelio Osorio-Rosas letter dated 03/30/2031 re: addendum to DE 5/second part . Paper filing deficiency: None. [12059065] (DJV) [Entered: 03/31/2021 08:59 AM]
March 30, 2021 Filing 5 Filed Appellant Emelio Osorio-Rosas : Civil Rule 60 motion part 1. Deficiencies: case closed no service date. [12059049] (DJV) [Entered: 03/31/2021 08:53 AM]
March 15, 2021 Filing 4 Filed Appellant Emelio Osorio-Rosas Generic Motion to Perfect the Apppeal ; request for time schedule order. Deficiencies: case closed . Served on 03/04/2021. [12042224] (DJV) [Entered: 03/16/2021 07:37 AM]
March 12, 2021 Filing 3 Filed order (MILAN D. SMITH, JR., BRIDGET S. BADE and PATRICK J. BUMATAY): A review of the record demonstrates that this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because the notice of appeal, dated and filed on February 17, 2021, was not filed or delivered to prison officials within 30 days after the district courts judgment entered on December 11, 2020. See 28 U.S.C. 2107(a); United States v. Sadler, 480 F.3d 932, 937 (9th Cir. 2007) (requirement of timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional). Consequently, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. DISMISSED. [12039364] (AF) [Entered: 03/12/2021 11:32 AM]
March 10, 2021 Filing 2 Received notification from District Court re: payment of docket fee. Amount Paid: USD 505.00. Date paid: 03/05/2021. [12031157] (RT) [Entered: 03/10/2021 02:44 PM]
February 19, 2021 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 Emelio Osorio-Rosas opening brief due 04/19/2021. [12010042] (JMR) [Entered: 02/19/2021 02:34 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.

Search for this case: Emelio Osorio-Rosas v. David Shinn, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner / appellant: EMELIO OSORIO-ROSAS
Represented By: Emelio Osorio-Rosas
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent / appellee: DAVID SHINN, Director, ADOC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Respondent / appellee: ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?