Vadim Miesegaes v. Malinda Durnen, et al
| PATRICK MCLAUGHLIN |
| VADIM STANLEY MIESEGAES |
| MALINDA DURNEN, Shift-Lead; Senior Psychiatric Technician, individual and official capacity, AKA Mindy, EARL SMITH, Unit Supervisor; Psychiatric Technician, individual and official capacity and JASON BLACK, Executive Director, Clinical Social Worker, individual and official capacity |
| 21-55708 |
| July 6, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| VADIM MIESEGAES V. MALINDA DURNEN |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 31, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 Filed original and 0 copies of Appellant Vadim Stanley Miesegaes opening brief of 14 pages (Informal: Yes). Served on 08/27/2021. [12216730] (SML) [Entered: 08/31/2021 02:14 PM] |
| Filing 6 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: MF): The court has received and reviewed appellants response to this courts July 12, 2021 order to show cause. Appellant attests that he delivered the notice of appeal to prison authorities on April 12, 2021, within 30 days after entry of the district courts judgment. See 28 U.S.C. 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), (c)(1). Accordingly, the order to show cause is discharged. The previously established briefing schedule remains in effect. [12188241] (AF) [Entered: 07/30/2021 02:32 PM] |
| Filing 5 Filed Appellant Vadim Stanley Miesegaes response to order to show cause of 7/12/21 . Served on 07/22/2021. [12184432] (DJV) [Entered: 07/27/2021 02:27 PM] |
| Filing 4 Received copy of District Court order filed on 07/12/2021 to grant in forma pauperis. [12170776] (DJV) [Entered: 07/13/2021 11:04 AM] |
| Filing 3 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: CO): The district court judgment was entered on the docket on March 26, 2021. Appellants notice of appeal from that judgment was dated April 12, 2021, but was not filed until July 1, 2021. Thus, the notice of appeal was not filed within 30 days after the entry of the judgment. See 28 U.S.C 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). Because appellant is a pro se prisoner, however, the notice of appeal is deemed filed when it was delivered to prison authorities for forwarding to the court. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 270 (1988). Accordingly, within 21 days after the date of this order, appellant shall file with this court a declaration or notarized statement attesting to the date on which the notice of appeal was deposited in the institutions internal mail system and whether first-class postage was prepaid, or otherwise show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Douglas v. Noelle, 567 F.3d 1103 (9th Cir. 2009). If appellant does not comply with this order, the Clerk shall dismiss this appeal pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 42-1. Briefing is suspended pending further order of this court. The Clerk will serve a Form 33 Inmate Declaration of Timely Filing on appellant along with this order. [12169883] (CKP) [Entered: 07/12/2021 01:28 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed referral notice (Deputy Clerk:CKP): Referring to the district court for determination whether in forma pauperis status should continue for this appeal. [12167060] (CKP) [Entered: 07/08/2021 02:54 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCE OF PRO SE APPELLANT AND NO APPEARANCE FOR APPELLEES. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Vadim Stanley Miesegaes opening brief due 08/30/2021. [12163522] (JMR) [Entered: 07/06/2021 01:29 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.
| Search for this case: Vadim Miesegaes v. Malinda Durnen, et al | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff / appellant: VADIM STANLEY MIESEGAES | |
| Represented By: | Vadim Stanley Miesegaes |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant / appellee: MALINDA DURNEN, Shift-Lead; Senior Psychiatric Technician, individual and official capacity, AKA Mindy | |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant / appellee: EARL SMITH, Unit Supervisor; Psychiatric Technician, individual and official capacity | |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant / appellee: JASON BLACK, Executive Director, Clinical Social Worker, individual and official capacity | |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: PATRICK MCLAUGHLIN | |
| 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 | [ Unicourt | 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.
