USA v. Pangang Group Company, Ltd., et al
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| PANGANG GROUP COMPANY, LTD., PANGANG GROUP STEEL VANADIUM & TITANIUM COMPANY, LTD., PANGANG GROUP TITANIUM INDUSTRY COMPANY, LTD. and PANGANG GROUP INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC & TRADING COMPANY |
| 22-10058 |
| March 4, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 7, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 3 Attorney David Countryman substituted by Attorney Matthew Martin Yelovich. [12388345] (RL) [Entered: 03/07/2022 03:16 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Matthew Martin Yelovich (U.S. Attorney's Office,450 Golden Gate Avenue, 11th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94102) for Appellee USA. Substitution for Attorney Mr. David Countryman for Appellee USA. Date of service: 03/07/2022. (Party was previously proceeding with counsel.) [12387956] [22-10058] (Yelovich, Matthew) [Entered: 03/07/2022 12:23 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL. Reporters Transcript required: Yes. Sentence imposed: N/A. Transcript ordered by 03/25/2022. Transcript due 04/25/2022. Appellant briefs and excerpts due by 06/03/2022 for Pangang Group Company, Ltd., Pangang Group International Economic & Trading Company, Pangang Group Steel Vanadium & Titanium Company, Ltd. and Pangang Group Titanium Industry Company, Ltd.. Appellee brief due 07/05/2022 for United States of America. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12386924] (JMR) [Entered: 03/04/2022 04:01 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.
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.
