Thomas Gandara v. Gavin Newsom, et al
| THOMAS ARTHUR GANDARA |
| GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor of California, TIMOTHY HOLLANDHURST, Superior Court Judge, Riverside California, EMMA C. SMITH, Superior Court Judge, Riverside, California, MICHAEL A. HESTREN, Riverside County District Attorney, AMBER LEE ZEXLER, Deputy District Attorney Riverside County, STEVEN L. HARMON, Riverside County Public Defender, MONICA NGUYEN, Deputy Public Defender Riverside County, NEAL HARRISON, Deputy Public Defender Riverside County, HARGUES, Deputy, Riverside County Sherriff's Department and REDD, Deputy,Riverside County Sherriff's Department |
| 22-55214 |
| February 28, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Prisoner-Civil Rights |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| THOMAS GANDARA V. GAVIN NEWSOM, ET AL |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 15, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Filed original and 7 copies of Appellant Thomas Arthur Gandara opening brief of 11 pages (Informal: Yes). Served on 04/12/2022. [12422648] (LA) [Entered: 04/15/2022 12:15 PM] |
| Filing 3 Received notification from District Court re: payment of docket fee. Amount Paid: USD 505.00. Date paid: 03/22/2022. [12401187] (BY) [Entered: 03/22/2022 08:20 AM] |
| Filing 2 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: CKP): Order to show cause docket fee due [12383210] (CKP) [Entered: 03/01/2022 01:32 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCE OF PRO SE APPELLANT & NO APPEARANCE FOR APPELLEES. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Thomas Arthur Gandara opening brief due 04/26/2022. [12382369] (OC) [Entered: 02/28/2022 04:14 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.
