Kim Rogers v. Katherine Lester, et al
| KIM EDWARD ROGERS |
| KATHERINE LESTER, Sacramento Police Chief, K. SIMMONS, #693, P. FONG, #3015, SACRAMENTO POLICE DEPARTMENT, DON NOTTOLI, Chair Sacramento Board of Supervisors, RICH DESMOND, Vice-Chair Sacramento Board of Supervisors, PHIL SERNA, Sacramento Board of Supervisors, PATRICK KENNEDY, Sacramento Board of Supervisors and SUE TRUST, Sacramento Board of Supervisors |
| 22-16878 |
| December 7, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 24, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 2 Filed order (KIM MCLANE WARDLAW, RICHARD R. CLIFTON and GABRIEL P. SANCHEZ) A review of the record demonstrates that this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because the November 29, 2022 magistrate judge order challenged in the appeal is not final or appealable. See Serine v. Peterson, 989 F.2d 371, 372-73 (9th Cir. 1993) (magistrate judges findings and recommendations not appealable). Consequently, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. DISMISSED. [12637747] (JMR) [Entered: 01/24/2023 04:41 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Kim Edward Rogers opening brief due 01/30/2023. Appellees Rich Desmond, P. Fong, Patrick Kennedy, Katherine Lester, Don Nottoli, Sacramento Police Department, Phil Serna, K. Simmons and Sue Trust answering brief due 03/01/2023. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12604895] (JMR) [Entered: 12/07/2022 04:33 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.
