Cyrus Hazari v. Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clar, et al
| CYRUS HAZARI |
| SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA, APPEAL COURT OF THE SIXTH DISTRICT, State of California, CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT, State of California, JUDICIAL COUNCIL, State of California, MANDY BRADY, MATTHEW WENDT, MESSNER REEVES, LLP, D. D. HUGHMANICK, TERRA LAW LLP, PETER CASSINI, ANTHONY PEREIRA and WEDGEMANOR HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION |
| 22-16174 |
| August 4, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other Personal Injury |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 23, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 Filed order (Appellate Commissioner: Lisa B. Fitzgerald ): On August 3, 2022, appellant filed in the district court an amended notice of appeal captioned for appeal No. 22-16046. Because appeal No. 22-16046 had been dismissed on July 21, 2022, the amended notice of appeal was treated as a new notice of appeal from the district courts July 19, 2022 and July 22, 2022 orders, and appeal No. 22-16174 was opened. The scope of appeal No. 22-16174 is limited to review of the district courts July 19, 2022 and July 22, 2022 orders. A review of the record suggests that this court may lack jurisdiction over the appeal in part because the district courts July 19, 2022 and July 22, 2022 orders are not final, appealable orders. See 28 U.S.C. 1291; United States v. Washington, 573 F.2d 1121, 1122 (9th Cir. 1978) (order denying motion to disqualify judge not final or appealable). Within 21 days of this order, appellant must show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellee may file a response within 10 days after service of the memorandum. A review of this courts docket reflects that the filing and docketing fees for this appeal remain due. Within 21 days of this order, appellant must pay to the district court the $505.00 filing and docketing fees for this appeal and file in this court proof of payment or file in this court a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. The Clerk will serve a Form 4 financial affidavit on appellant. If appellant does not comply fully with this order, this appeal will be dismissed by the Clerk for failure to prosecute. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. The briefing schedule is stayed pending further order of the court. [12548286] (RT) [Entered: 09/23/2022 04:01 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Cyrus Hazari opening brief due 10/04/2022. Appellees Appeal Court of the Sixth District, Mandy Brady, California Supreme Court, Peter Cassini, D. D. Hughmanick, Judicial Council, Messner Reeves, LLP, Anthony Pereira, Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, Terra Law LLP, Wedgemanor Homeowners Association and Matthew Wendt answering brief due 11/04/2022. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12509728] (RT) [Entered: 08/04/2022 02:10 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.
