Troy Emanuel, Jr. v. Dwight Neven, et al
| TROY RAY EMANUEL, Jr. |
| DWIGHT NEVEN, Warden and ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR THE STATE OF NEVADA |
| 21-15498 |
| March 19, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| TROY EMANUEL, JR. V. DWIGHT NEVEN |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 11, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 Streamlined request [2] by Appellant Troy Ray Emanuel, Jr. to extend time to file the brief is approved. Amended briefing schedule: Appellant Troy Ray Emanuel Jr. opening brief due 06/17/2021. Appellees Attorney General for the State of Nevada and Dwight Neven, Warden answering brief due 07/19/2021. The optional reply brief is due 21 days from the date of service of the answering brief. [12109626] (JN) [Entered: 05/11/2021 03:46 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed (ECF) Streamlined request for extension of time to file Opening Brief by Appellant Troy Ray Emanuel, Jr.. New requested due date is 06/17/2021. [12109590] [21-15498]--[COURT UPDATE: Updated docket text to reflect content of filing. 05/11/2021 by SLM] (Bizzaro, Amelia) [Entered: 05/11/2021 03:29 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Troy Ray Emanuel Jr. opening brief due 05/18/2021. Appellees Attorney General for the State of Nevada and Dwight Neven, Warden answering brief due 06/17/2021. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12047330] (WL) [Entered: 03/19/2021 10:49 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
