Robert Johnson v. Rudy Monarrez, et al
| CITY OF MESA, a municipality, JHONTE JONES, an individual and ERNESTO CALDERON, an individual |
| ROBERT JOHNSON, an individual |
| RUDY MONARREZ, an individual |
| 21-16647 |
| October 7, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 23, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 MEDIATION CONFERENCE RESCHEDULED - DIAL-IN AssessmentConference, 12/14/2021, 2:30 p.m. Pacific Time. (originally scheduled on 12/01/2021 ). [12297106] [21-16646, 21-16647, 21-16648] (VS) [Entered: 11/23/2021 04:00 PM] |
| Filing 6 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: LCC): In addition to all other issues the parties wish to raise in their briefs in these appeals, the parties are directed to address the basis for this courts jurisdiction. See Villanueva v. California, 986 F.3d 1158, 1164 (9th Cir. 2021) (court of appeals has jurisdiction over interlocutory appeal from denial of qualified immunity only to the extent that it turns on an issue of law) (citation omitted). The existing briefing schedules remain in effect. [12268054] [21-16646, 21-16647] (OC) [Entered: 10/25/2021 04:08 PM] |
| Filing 5 Filed order MEDIATION (RGA): In Appeal No. 21-16646, the briefing schedules previously set by the court are amended as follows: appellant's opening brief is due February 10, 2022; appellee's answering brief is due March 14, 2022; appellant's optional reply brief is due within 21 days from the service date of the answering brief. In Appeal No. 21-16647, the briefing schedule previously set by the court is amended as follows: appellant's opening brief is due February 10, 2022; appellee's answering brief is due March 14, 2022; appellant's optional reply brief is due within 21 days from the service date of the answering brief. In Appeal No. 21-16648, the briefing schedule previously set by the court is amended as follows: appellant's opening brief is due February 10, 2022; appellee's answering brief is due March 14, 2022; appellant's optional reply brief is due within 21 days from the service date of the answering brief. [12259827] [21-16646, 21-16647, 21-16648] (OC) [Entered: 10/18/2021 11:58 AM] |
| Filing 4 MEDIATION CONFERENCE SCHEDULED - DIAL-IN AssessmentConference, 12/01/2021, 2:00 p.m., PACIFIC Time. See order for instructions and details. [12259574] [21-16646, 21-16647, 21-16648] (VS) [Entered: 10/18/2021 09:53 AM] |
| Filing 3 The Mediation Questionnaire for this case was filed on 10/14/2021. 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.[12257118]. [21-16647] (AD) [Entered: 10/14/2021 12:44 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed (ECF) Appellant Rudy Monarrez Mediation Questionnaire. Date of service: 10/14/2021. [12256973] [21-16647] (Alvarado, Kim) [Entered: 10/14/2021 11:41 AM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Rudy Monarrez Mediation Questionnaire due on 10/14/2021. Appellant Rudy Monarrez opening brief due 12/10/2021. Appellee Robert Johnson answering brief due 01/10/2022. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12250376] (RT) [Entered: 10/07/2021 09:37 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.
