Stanton McCain, II v. Department of Corrections, et al
| STANTON HARRY MCCAIN II |
| DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, NAIMA NEGHMOUCHE, DOC/TRU Officer, MICHELLE HENDERLING, DOC/TRU PREA and STEPHEN SINCLAIR, DOC Secretary |
| 21-36007 |
| December 8, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 5, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Filed order (Deputy Clerk: MF): Appellants letter to the court received on December 28, 2021 is construed as a motion for voluntary dismissal of this appeal. So construed, the motion is granted (Docket Entry No. [ # 3 ]). This appeal is dismissed. See Fed. R. App. P. 42(b). This order served on the district court shall act as and for the mandate of this court. [12332674] (AF) [Entered: 01/05/2022 05:32 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed Appellant Stanton Harry McCain, II motion to dismiss case pursuant to FRAP 42(b). Deficiencies: None. Served on 12/14/2021. [12326708] (DJV) [Entered: 12/29/2021 06:45 AM] |
| Filing 2 CLERK ORDER FILED (Deputy Clerk CKP) Prisoner fee authorization form sent to prisoner. [12311505] (CKP) [Entered: 12/09/2021 01:13 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Stanton Harry McCain II opening brief due 02/07/2022. Appellees Department of Corrections, Michelle Henderling, Naima Neghmouche and Stephen Sinclair answering brief due 03/07/2022. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12310528] (JMR) [Entered: 12/08/2021 03:38 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.
