Timothy Wilkins v. Correctional Officers, et al
| TIMOTHY DEANORE WILKINS |
| CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS, JONES, Correctional Sergeant, individual, LUND, Correctional Officer, individual, STEVE R. BRENNEMAN, Correctional Officer, individual, ANGELO DOLIDA, Correctional Officer, individual, A. MORENO, Correctional Officer, in his individual capacity, D. MANER, Correctional Officer, in his individual capacity, JACOBS, Correctional Officer, in his individual capacity and LESLIE KINGSLEY, Correctional Officer, in her individual capacity |
| 21-56321 |
| December 8, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| TIMOTHY WILKINS V. CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 2, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 Filed clerk order: The answering brief [ # 8 ] submitted by appellees is filed. Within 7 days of the filing of this order, filer is ordered to file 6 copies of the brief in paper format, accompanied by certification (attached to the end of each copy of the brief) that the brief is identical to the version submitted electronically. Cover color: red. The supplemental excerpts of record [ # 9 ] submitted by appellees are filed. Within 7 days of this order, filer is ordered to file 3 copies of the excerpts in paper format securely bound on the left side, with white covers. The paper copies shall be submitted to the principal office of the Clerk. [12359322] (LA) [Entered: 02/02/2022 04:20 PM] |
| Filing 9 Submitted (ECF) supplemental excerpts of record. Submitted by Appellees A. Moreno, Angelo Dolida, D. Maner, Jacobs, Leslie Kingsley, Jones, Lund and Steve R. Brenneman. Date of service: 02/02/2022. [12359275] [21-56321] (Gille, Ryan) [Entered: 02/02/2022 04:07 PM] |
| Filing 8 Submitted (ECF) Answering Brief for review. Submitted by Appellees A. Moreno, Angelo Dolida, D. Maner, Jacobs, Leslie Kingsley, Jones, Lund and Steve R. Brenneman. Date of service: 02/02/2022. [12359265] [21-56321] (Gille, Ryan) [Entered: 02/02/2022 04:04 PM] |
| Filing 7 CLERK ORDER FILED (Deputy Clerk CKP) Prisoner completed authorization fee order. [12337311] (CKP) [Entered: 01/11/2022 11:13 AM] |
| Filing 6 Received PLRA authorization response from appellant. Dated 01/01/2022. [12337205] (RR) [Entered: 01/11/2022 10:28 AM] |
| Filing 5 Filed original and 0 copies of Appellant Timothy Deanore Wilkins opening brief of 9 pages (Informal: Yes). Served on 01/04/2022. [12336121] (KT) [Entered: 01/10/2022 02:25 PM] |
| Filing 4 Attorney Tessa Rose Lessner in 21-56321 substituted by Attorney Ryan Thomas Gille in 21-56321 [12326471] (RR) [Entered: 12/28/2021 04:17 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Ryan Thomas Gille (California Department of Justice, Office of the Attorney General, 455 Golden Gate Ave, San Francisco, CA 94102) for Appellees A. Moreno, Angelo Dolida, D. Maner, Jacobs, Leslie Kingsley, Jones, Lund and Steve R. Brenneman. Substitution for Attorney Tessa Rose Lessner for Appellees Steve R. Brenneman, Angelo Dolida, Jacobs, Jones, Leslie Kingsley, Lund, D. Maner and A. Moreno. Date of service: 12/28/2021. (Party was previously proceeding with counsel.) [12326136] [21-56321] (Gille, Ryan) [Entered: 12/28/2021 01:34 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: JW): The appeal filed December 2, 2021 is a preliminary injunction appeal. Accordingly, Ninth Circuit Rule 3-3 shall apply. The briefing schedule shall be established as follows: appellants opening brief is due January 5, 2022; appellees answering brief is due February 2, 2022; and appellants optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. The appeal and any motions pending at the time briefing is completed shall be referred to the next available motions panel for disposition. No streamlined extensions of time will be approved. See 9th Cir. R. 31-2.2(a)(3). Any request for an extension of time to file a brief must be made by written motion under Ninth Circuit Rule 31-2.2(b). A review of the district court docket reflects that appellant was permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in the district court, and that such permission has not been revoked to date. Consequently, appellant's forma pauperis status continues in this court. Fed. R. App. P. 24(a). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(1) and (2), however, appellant must pay the full amount of the filing and docketing fees for this appeal when funds are available in appellant's account. Consequently, within 21 days after the filing date of this order, appellant shall complete and file with this court the enclosed authorization form, which directs the prison officials at appellant's institution to assess, collect, and forward to the court the $505.00 filing and docketing fees for this appeal on a monthly basis whenever funds exist in appellant's trust fund account. These fees will continue to be collected regardless of the date or manner of disposition of this appeal. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(b)(2) and (e)(2). Appellant is not responsible for payment when the funds in appellants prison trust account total less than $10.00, but payments must resume when additional deposits are made or funds are otherwise available. Failure to file timely the opening brief shall result in the automatic dismissal of this appeal by the Clerk for failure to prosecute. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. The Clerk will send a prisoner authorization form to appellant along with this order. [12313989] (CKP) [Entered: 12/13/2021 12:21 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: To be set. Preliminary Injunction Appeal, C.R. 3-3. [12309741] (JBS) [Entered: 12/08/2021 11:03 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.
