Raul Arellano v. Michael Santos, et al
| RAUL ARELLANO |
| DOCTOR MICHAEL BALBIN SANTOS, Primary Care Provider, CALIFORNIA CORRECTIONAL HEALTH CARE SERVICES, DANIEL PARAMO, Warden and CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION |
| 21-56348 |
| December 14, 2021 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| RAUL ARELLANO V. MICHAEL SANTOS, ET AL |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 11, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 Streamlined request by Appellant Raul Arellano to extend time to file the brief is approved. Streamlined requests allow for a 30 day extension of time to file the brief. Amended briefing schedule: Appellant Raul Arellano opening brief due 03/09/2022. Appellees California Correctional Health Care Services, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Daniel Paramo, Warden and Michael Balbin Santos answering brief due 04/08/2022. The optional reply brief is due 21 days from the date of service of the answering brief. [12368454] (JN) [Entered: 02/11/2022 04:18 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Raul Arellano opening brief due 02/07/2022. Appellees California Correctional Health Care Services, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Daniel Paramo, Warden and Michael Balbin Santos answering brief due 03/07/2022. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12315604] (JMR) [Entered: 12/14/2021 01:52 PM] |
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.
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.
