Estate of Wangsheng Leng v. City of Issaquah, et al
| ESTATE OF WANGSHENG LENG, by and through administrator Liping Yang |
| CITY OF ISSAQUAH, MICHAEL LUCHT, Issaquah Police Officer #1201 and KYLEN WHITTOM, Issaquah Police Officer #1210 |
| 21-35040 |
| January 15, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| ESTATE OF WANGSHENG LENG V. CITY OF ISSAQUAH |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 25, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 8 Streamlined request [7] by Appellants City of Issaquah, Michael Lucht and Kylen Whittom to extend time to file the brief is approved. Amended briefing schedule: Appellants City of Issaquah, Michael Lucht and Kylen Whittom opening brief due 04/14/2021. Appellee Estate of Wangsheng Leng answering brief due 05/14/2021. The optional reply brief is due 21 days from the date of service of the answering brief. [12017299] (BG) [Entered: 02/25/2021 05:02 PM] |
| Filing 7 Filed (ECF) Streamlined request for extension of time to file Opening Brief by Appellants City of Issaquah, Michael Lucht and Kylen Whittom. New requested due date is 04/14/2021. [12017277] [21-35040] (Augenthaler, Brian) [Entered: 02/25/2021 04:48 PM] |
| Filing 6 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: LCC): In addition to all other issues the parties wish to raise in their briefs, the parties shall address the basis for this courts jurisdiction over this qualified immunity appeal, including over the appeal filed by the City of Issaquah. See Foster v. City of Indio, 908 F.3d 1204, 1210 (9th Cir. 2018) (court of appeals has jurisdiction over interlocutory qualified immunity appeal only to the extent the issue appealed concern[s], not which facts the parties might be able to prove, but, rather, whether or not certain given facts show[] a violation of clearly established law) (internal quotations and citations omitted); see also Dougherty v. City of Covina, 654 F.3d 892, 900 (9th Cir. 2011) (Qualified immunity does not shield municipalities from liability.). The previously established briefing schedule remains in effect. [11992928] (WL) [Entered: 02/04/2021 01:19 PM] |
| Filing 5 MEDIATION CONFERENCE RESCHEDULED - AssessmentConference, 02/12/2021, 11:00 a.m. Pacific Time. (originally scheduled on 02/10/2021 ). [11979404] (LW) [Entered: 01/25/2021 09:27 AM] |
| Filing 4 MEDIATION CONFERENCE SCHEDULED - DIAL IN AssessmentConference, 02/10/2021, 1:30 p.m., PACIFIC Time. The briefing schedule previously set by the court remains in effect. See order for instructions and details. [11975204] (LW) [Entered: 01/21/2021 02:39 PM] |
| Filing 3 The Mediation Questionnaire for this case was filed on 01/20/2021. 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.[11971914]. [21-35040] (AD) [Entered: 01/20/2021 06:44 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed (ECF) Appellants Kylen Whittom, Michael Lucht and City of Issaquah Mediation Questionnaire. Date of service: 01/20/2021. [11970034] [21-35040] (Augenthaler, Brian) [Entered: 01/20/2021 03:38 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: Appellants City of Issaquah, Michael Lucht and Kylen Whittom Mediation Questionnaire due on 01/22/2021. Appellants City of Issaquah, Michael Lucht and Kylen Whittom opening brief due 03/15/2021. Appellee Estate of Wangsheng Leng answering brief due 04/14/2021. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [11966032] (JBS) [Entered: 01/15/2021 02:02 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.
