Michael Sullivan v. M. Biter, et al
| MATTHEW CATE, J. CLARK KELSO, D. FOSTON, G. JAIME, R. GRISSOM, C. SORENSON, B. DAVEIGA, P. LEE, J. CASTRO and J. WILLAIMS |
| MICHAEL JOHN SULLIVAN |
| M. D. BITER, Warden |
| 21-16842 |
| November 2, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 29, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Filed Appellant Michael John Sullivan motion to extend time to file appellant opening brief until 01/28/2022. Deficiencies: None. Served on 12/23/2021. [12327209] (DJV) [Entered: 12/29/2021 02:00 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed order MEDIATION (RSK): This case is NOT SELECTED for inclusion in the Mediation Program. The briefing schedule previously set by the court is reset as follows: appellant's opening brief is due January 27, 2022; appellees answering brief is due February 28, 2022; appellants optional reply brief is due within 21 days from the service date of the answering brief. [12325767] (OC) [Entered: 12/28/2021 09:35 AM] |
| Filing 2 CLERK ORDER FILED (Deputy Clerk CKP) Prisoner fee authorization form sent to prisoner. [12278420] (CKP) [Entered: 11/04/2021 01:03 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Michael John Sullivan opening brief due 12/28/2021. Appellee M. D. Biter, Warden answering brief due 01/27/2022. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12276302] (OC) [Entered: 11/02/2021 03:47 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.
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.
