Kirk Williams v. McDonald's Corporation
Plaintiff / Appellant: KIRK DOUGLAS WILLIAMS
Defendant / Appellee: MCDONALD'S CORPORATION
Case Number: 22-16171
Filed: August 4, 2022
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Americans w/Disabilities Act-Empl
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 31, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 31, 2022 Filing 10 Sent Appellant a copy of DE numbers 2-5 in response to the letter of request filed on 10/31/2022. [12577282] (JR) [Entered: 10/31/2022 04:21 PM]
October 31, 2022 Filing 9 Filed Appellant Kirk Douglas Williams letter dated 10/26/2022 re: copy of docket sheet. Paper filing deficiency: None. Sent copy of docket. [12577259] (BJK) [Entered: 10/31/2022 04:10 PM]
August 31, 2022 Filing 8 Received notice of change of address dated 08/26/2022 from Kirk Douglas Williams. New address: Substance Abuse Facility, P.O. Box 5244, Corcoran, CA 93212-5244. [12530793] --[Edited: Updated Address. 08/31/2022 by TYL] (QDL) [Entered: 08/31/2022 02:04 PM]
August 22, 2022 Filing 7 Added Attorney(s) Nathaniel Garrett for party(s) Appellee McDonald's Corporation, in case 22-16171. [12522913] (QDL) [Entered: 08/22/2022 03:01 PM]
August 22, 2022 Filing 6 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Nathaniel P. Garrett (Jones Day, 555 California Street, 26th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94104) for Appellee McDonald's Corporation. Date of service: 08/22/2022. (Party was previously proceeding with counsel.) [12522882] [22-16171] (Garrett, Nathaniel) [Entered: 08/22/2022 02:47 PM]
August 22, 2022 Filing 5 Streamlined request by Appellant Kirk Douglas Williams to extend time to file the brief is not approved because it is unnecessary. The briefing schedule is stayed. See 9th Cir. R. 27-11. [12521975] (JN) [Entered: 08/22/2022 07:17 AM]
August 19, 2022 Filing 4 Filed Appellant Kirk Douglas Williams motion to proceed In Forma Pauperis. Deficiencies: None. Served on 08/14/2022. [12521587] (QDL) [Entered: 08/19/2022 03:23 PM]
August 19, 2022 Filing 3 Filed Appellant Kirk Douglas Williams motion to appoint pro bono counsel. Deficiencies: None. Served on 08/14/2022. [12521582] (QDL) [Entered: 08/19/2022 03:22 PM]
August 15, 2022 Filing 2 Received copy of amended notice of appeal from district court. [12517843] (QDL) [Entered: 08/16/2022 09:59 AM]
August 4, 2022 Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Kirk Douglas Williams opening brief due 10/04/2022. Appellee McDonald's Corporation answering brief due 11/04/2022. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12509580] (RT) [Entered: 08/04/2022 12:26 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: Kirk Williams v. McDonald's Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff / appellant: KIRK DOUGLAS WILLIAMS
Represented By: Kirk Douglas Williams
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: MCDONALD'S CORPORATION
Represented By: Robert A. Naeve Esquire
Represented By: Nathaniel Garrett Esquire
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.


Why Is My Information Online?