Nathan Caetano v. Kings County Sheriff, et al
| NATHAN CAETANO |
| KINGS COUNTY SHERIFF, NOCONA SOBOLESKI, Kings County Superior Court Executive Officer/Clerk of the Court and KEITH HOLLAND, Eastern District of Caliifornia Executive Officer/Clerk of the Court |
| 22-16067 |
| July 21, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Miller Act |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 8, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 MANDATE ISSUED. (MMS, DFO and DJF) [12535761] (RL) [Entered: 09/08/2022 09:14 AM] |
| Filing 3 Filed order (MARY M. SCHROEDER, DIARMUID F. O'SCANNLAIN and DANIELLE J. FORREST) A review of the record demonstrates that this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because the notice of appeal, served on July 14, 2022, and filed on July 20, 2022, was not filed or delivered to prison officials within 60 days after the district courts judgment entered on April 28, 2022. See 28 U.S.C. 2107(b); United States v. Sadler, 480 F.3d 932, 937 (9th Cir. 2007) (requirement of timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional). The petition for writ of mandamus filed in this court on May 20, 2022, petition No. 22-70094, did not constitute a notice of appeal of the district courts judgment under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 3, and did not toll the time in which to file a timely notice of appeal under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(4). Consequently, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. DISMISSED. [12519148] (JBS) [Entered: 08/17/2022 03:29 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed Appellant Nathan Caetano party listing, counsel listing, registration and admission to practice. Dated 08/05/2022. Paper filing deficiency: None. [12517382] (RL) [Entered: 08/15/2022 03:58 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCE OF PRO SE APPELLANT AND NO APPEARANCE FOR APPELLEES. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Nathan Caetano opening brief due 09/22/2022. [12499067] (RT) [Entered: 07/21/2022 10:44 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: Nathan Caetano v. Kings County Sheriff, 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: NATHAN CAETANO | |
| Represented By: | Nathan Caetano |
| 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: KINGS COUNTY SHERIFF | |
| 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: NOCONA SOBOLESKI, Kings County Superior Court Executive Officer/Clerk of the Court | |
| 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: KEITH HOLLAND, Eastern District of Caliifornia Executive Officer/Clerk of the Court | |
| 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.
