Francisco Duarte, et al v. City of Stockton, et al
| ALEJANDRO GUTIERREZ |
| FRANCISCO DUARTE |
| CITY OF STOCKTON, STOCKTON POLICE DEPARTMENT, ERIC JONES, KEVIN JAYE HACHLER, ERIC B. HOWARD, MICHAEL GANDY, CONNER NELSON and UNDERWOOD, Sergeant |
| 21-16929 |
| November 17, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
 FRANCISCO DUARTE, ET AL V. CITY OF STOCKTON, ET AL
|
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 15, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: MKS): Appellants motion (Docket Entry No. [ # 7 ]) for an extension of time to file the opening brief is granted in part. The opening brief is due April 12, 2022. The answering brief is due May 12, 2022. The optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12316871] (WL) [Entered: 12/15/2021 02:13 PM] |
| Filing 7 Filed (ECF) Appellant Francisco Duarte Motion to extend time to file Opening brief until 06/01/2022. Date of service: 12/13/2021. [12314814] [21-16929] (Huang, Yolanda) [Entered: 12/13/2021 06:41 PM] |
| Filing 6 MEDIATION ORDER FILED: By 12/27/2021, counsel to email Circuit Mediator regarding settlement potential. Include Ninth Circuit case name and number in subject line. This communication will be kept confidential, if requested, and should not be filed with the court. The existing briefing schedule remains in effect. SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS. [12313864] (VS) [Entered: 12/13/2021 11:34 AM] |
| Filing 5 The Mediation Questionnaire for this case was filed on 12/01/2021. 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.[12302515]. [21-16929] (AD) [Entered: 12/01/2021 12:44 PM] |
| Filing 4 Filed (ECF) Appellees City of Stockton, Michael Gandy, Kevin Jaye Hachler, Eric B. Howard, Eric Jones, Conner Nelson, Stockton Police Department and Underwood Mediation Questionnaire. Date of service: 12/01/2021. [12302178] [21-16929] (Ghannam, Jamil) [Entered: 12/01/2021 09:29 AM] |
| Filing 3 The Mediation Questionnaire for this case was filed on 11/29/2021. 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.[12299137]. [21-16929] (AD) [Entered: 11/29/2021 06:44 AM] |
| Filing 2 Filed (ECF) Appellant Francisco Duarte Mediation Questionnaire. Date of service: 11/29/2021. [12299126] [21-16929] (Huang, Yolanda) [Entered: 11/29/2021 04:02 AM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Francisco Duarte Mediation Questionnaire due on 11/24/2021. Appellant Francisco Duarte opening brief due 01/12/2022. Appellees City of Stockton, Michael Gandy, Kevin Jaye Hachler, Eric B. Howard, Eric Jones, Conner Nelson, Stockton Police Department and Underwood answering brief due 02/11/2022. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12290022] (JBS) [Entered: 11/17/2021 11:12 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.
