USA v. Ebenezer Howe, IV, et al
| PHI DEVELOPMENT LLC |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| EBENEZER K. HOWE IV |
| 21-35682 |
| August 18, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 27, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 Filed Appellant Mr. Ebenezer K. Howe, IV letter dated 09/23/2021 re: pro se notice that petition for writ of cert was filed. Paper filing deficiency: None. [12240889] (DJV) [Entered: 09/28/2021 07:36 AM] |
| Filing 5 Filed (ECF) Appellee USA reply to response (). Date of service: 09/13/2021. [12226398] [21-35682] (Sheehan, Anthony) [Entered: 09/13/2021 10:38 AM] |
| Filing 4 Filed Appellant Mr. Ebenezer K. Howe, IV response opposing motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. [12225702] (NAC) [Entered: 09/10/2021 02:46 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed (ECF) Appellee USA Motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, Motion for sanctions. Date of service: 09/01/2021. [12217850] [21-35682] (Sheehan, Anthony) [Entered: 09/01/2021 12:38 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed original and 5 copies of Appellant Mr. Ebenezer K. Howe, IV opening brief of 13 pages (Informal: No). Served on 08/24/2021. [12214198] (LA) [Entered: 08/27/2021 04:05 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Ebenezer K. Howe IV opening brief due 10/20/2021. Appellee United States of America answering brief due 11/22/2021. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12205037] (RT) [Entered: 08/18/2021 02:59 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.
