Daniel Escamilla v. City of Santa Ana, et al
| DOES, 1 through 50, inclusive |
| DANIEL O. ESCAMILLA |
| CITY OF SANTA ANA, a municipality, POLICE CHIEF DAVID VALENTIN, individually and in official capacity, employee of City of Santa Ana, OFFICER M. GUTIERREZ, individually and in official capacity, employee of City of Santa Ana and OFFICER RODRIGUEZ, individually and in official capacity, employee of City of Santa Ana |
| 21-56326 |
| December 8, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| DANIEL ESCAMILLA V. CITY OF SANTA ANA, ET AL |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 10, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Filed (ECF) Appellant Mr. Daniel O. Escamilla Correspondence: Letter informing clerk that motion to extend time or reopen for appeal has been filed at the district court level. Order dismissing on jurisdictional grounds is requested to be held in abeyance pending determination of motion by district court.. Date of service: 01/10/2022 [12336686] [21-56326] (Escamilla, Daniel) [Entered: 01/10/2022 06:58 PM] |
| Filing 3 Filed order (Deputy Clerk: CKP) Motion to dismiss case for failure to prosecute (Cir. Rule 42-1). Pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 42-1, this appeal is dismissed for failure to respond to order. (Order dated 12/09/2021).This order served on the district court shall, 21 days after the date of the order, act as the mandate of this court. [12335078] (CKP) [Entered: 01/09/2022 01:37 AM] |
| Filing 2 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: MF): The district courts judgment was entered on the docket on September 23, 2021. Appellants notice of appeal was filed in the district court on December 7, 2021. Accordingly, the record suggests that this court may lack jurisdiction over this appeal because the notice of appeal was not filed 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), 4(c); United States v. Sadler, 480 F.3d 932, 937 (9th Cir. 2007) (requirement of timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional). The record does not reflect that appellant has filed a motion in the district court to extend or reopen the time for appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), (6), and 26(b)(1). Within 21 days after the date of this order, appellant shall move for voluntary dismissal of the appeal, or show cause why it should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. If appellant elects to show cause, a response may be filed within 10 days after service of the memorandum. 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 the court. [12311538] (CKP) [Entered: 12/09/2021 01:25 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Daniel O. Escamilla opening brief due 02/07/2022. Appellees City of Santa Ana, M. Gutierrez, Rodriguez and David Valentin answering brief due 03/07/2022. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12310588] (JMR) [Entered: 12/08/2021 03:58 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: Daniel Escamilla v. City of Santa Ana, 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: DANIEL O. ESCAMILLA | |
| Represented By: | Daniel O. Escamilla |
| 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: CITY OF SANTA ANA, a municipality | |
| Represented By: | Sandra Schwarzmann |
| 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: POLICE CHIEF DAVID VALENTIN, individually and in official capacity, employee of City of Santa Ana | |
| Represented By: | Sandra Schwarzmann |
| 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: OFFICER M. GUTIERREZ, individually and in official capacity, employee of City of Santa Ana | |
| Represented By: | Sandra Schwarzmann |
| 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: OFFICER RODRIGUEZ, individually and in official capacity, employee of City of Santa Ana | |
| Represented By: | Sandra Schwarzmann |
| 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: DOES, 1 through 50, inclusive | |
| 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.
