Sacramento Superior Court v. Gregory Downs
| GREGORY DOWNS |
| SACRAMENTO SUPERIOR COURT |
| 21-55392 |
| April 21, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 8, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 MANDATE ISSUED. (RAP, MSB and DJF) [12136840] (NAC) [Entered: 06/08/2021 07:58 AM] |
| Filing 4 Filed order (RICHARD A. PAEZ, MARSHA S. BERZON and DANIELLE J. HUNSAKER) : On February 22, 2019, appellant filed a notice of removal seeking to remove three state court habeas proceedings initiated by appellant to the district court for the Central District of California. On May 20, 2019, the district court remanded the habeas proceedings to state court. Appellant filed a previous appeal of the district courts May 20, 2019 remand order, which this court dismissed in appeal No. 19-55744. On February 8, 2021, appellant filed a motion in the district court pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 60, seeking relief from the May 20, 2019 remand order. The district court denied appellants Rule 60 motion on March 11, 2021, and appellant filed a notice of appeal. A review of the record demonstrates that this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because the May 20, 2019 order, which denied appellants motion for relief from the district courts remand order, is not reviewable. See 28 U.S.C. 1447(d); see also Kunzi v. Pan Am. World Airways, Inc., 833 F.2d 1291, 1293 (9th Cir. 1987) (order remanding a removed action to state court based on ground enumerated in 28 U.S.C. 1447(c) is not reviewable on appeal or otherwise). Consequently, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. All pending motions are denied as moot. DISMISSED. [12114639] (RT) [Entered: 05/17/2021 09:02 AM] |
| Filing 3 Filed Appellant Gregory Downs motion to proceed In Forma Pauperis. Deficiencies: None [12114344] (NAC) [Entered: 05/16/2021 07:20 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed Appellant Gregory Downs motion to appoint pro bono counsel. Deficiencies: None [12109371] (NAC) [Entered: 05/11/2021 02:00 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCE OF PRO SE APPELLANT AND NO APPEARANCE FOR APPELLEE. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Gregory Downs opening brief due 06/15/2021. [12082033] (JMR) [Entered: 04/21/2021 10:40 AM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
| Search for this case: Sacramento Superior Court v. Gregory Downs | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant / appellant: GREGORY DOWNS | |
| Represented By: | Gregory Downs |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff / appellee: SACRAMENTO SUPERIOR COURT | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
