Jeffery Martin v. Pierce County, et al
MIGUEL BALDERRAMA, MD, in his official and individual capacity, NAPHCARE DOE EMPLOYEES, 1-10; in their individual and official capacities, PIERCE COUNTY, Doe Correction Officers 1-10, JANEL FRENCH, LPN, in her official and individual capacity, PIERCE COUNTY, a Washington political subdivision, NAPHCARE, INC., an Alabama corporation doing business in the State of Washington and IRINA HUGHES |
JEFFERY S. MARTIN |
21-35251 |
April 5, 2021 |
U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
Other |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on May 14, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 7 MEDIATION STATUS REPORT DUE - 06/02/2021. The briefing schedule previously set by the court is amended as follows :Appellant Jeffery S. Martin opening brief due 07/01/2021. Appellees Miguel Balderrama, Janel French, Irina Hughes, Naphcare Doe Employees, Naphcare, Inc. and Pierce County answering brief due 08/02/2021Appellants optional reply brief is due within twenty one 21 days from the service date of the answer brief. See order for details. [12113192] (LW) [Entered: 05/14/2021 11:19 AM] |
Filing 6 The Mediation Questionnaire for this case was filed on 04/29/2021. 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.[12097534]. [21-35251] (AD) [Entered: 04/29/2021 06:44 PM] |
Filing 5 Filed (ECF) Appellant Jeffery S. Martin Mediation Questionnaire. Date of service: 04/29/2021. [12097283] [21-35251] (Martin, Bardi) [Entered: 04/29/2021 03:24 PM] |
Filing 4 MEDIATION ORDER FILED: By 05/11/2021, 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. [12090278] (LW) [Entered: 04/28/2021 03:11 PM] |
Filing 3 Mail returned on addressed to Bardi David Martin, Esquire for Jeffery S. Martin, re: [ # 2 ] Mediation Order to set response by any party to anything. Returned envelope notes: Return to sender, not deliverable as addressed, unable to forward. Resending to: 100 West Harrison Street South Tower Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98119 [12083823] --[Edited: Updated Address. 04/22/2021 by TYL] (JBS) [Entered: 04/22/2021 01:56 PM] |
Filing 2 Filed order MEDIATION (LW): The Court of Appeals records do not indicate that appellant has filed a Mediation Questionnaire in accordance with Circuit Rule 3-4. Within seven (7) days of the filing of this order, appellant shall: (a) file a Mediation Questionnaire (available on the courts website: www.ca9.uscourts.gov), or (b) dismiss the appeal voluntarily pursuant to Fed.R.App.P. 42(b). Information about the mediation program may be found on the courts website: www.ca9.uscourt.gov/mediation. [12077252] (OC) [Entered: 04/16/2021 12:03 PM] |
Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. SEND MQ: Yes. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Jeffery S. Martin Mediation Questionnaire due on 04/12/2021. Appellant Jeffery S. Martin opening brief due 06/01/2021. Appellees Miguel Balderrama, Janel French, Irina Hughes, Naphcare Doe Employees, Naphcare, Inc. and Pierce County answering brief due 07/01/2021. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12063205] (JMR) [Entered: 04/05/2021 09:56 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.