George Austin v. ABC Legal
| GEORGE JARVIS AUSTIN |
| ABC LEGAL |
| 22-15929 |
| June 23, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Jobs |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 23, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant George Jarvis Austin opening brief due 08/22/2022. Appellee ABC Legal answering brief due 09/22/2022. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12478186] (RT) [Entered: 06/23/2022 11:00 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.
| Search for this case: George Austin v. ABC Legal | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff / appellant: GEORGE JARVIS AUSTIN | |
| Represented By: | George Jarvis Austin |
| 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: ABC LEGAL | |
| Represented By: | Matthew S. Dente |
| Represented By: | London Meservy |
| 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.
