Edgar Vasquez, et al v. Felicia Ponce, et al
| LANCE AARON WILSON and MAURICE SMITH |
| EDGAR VASQUEZ |
| FELICIA PONCE, Warden and MICHAEL CARVAJAL, Director of the Bureau of Prisons |
| 22-55563 |
| June 7, 2022 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Habeas Corpus |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 8, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 Filed (ECF) Appellees Michael Carvajal and Felicia Ponce response to motion ([ # 5 ] Party Motion). Date of service: 07/08/2022. [12489580] [22-55563] (Beck, Daniel) [Entered: 07/08/2022 01:51 PM] |
| Filing 5 Filed Appellant Edgar Vasquez motion to appoint counsel. Deficiencies: None. Served on 06/15/2022. [12487950] (HH) [Entered: 07/06/2022 09:01 PM] |
| Filing 4 Received notification from District Court re: payment of docket fee. Amount Paid: USD 505.00. Date paid: 07/06/2022. [12487551] (HH) [Entered: 07/06/2022 02:23 PM] |
| Filing 3 Money Order number 28028783362 for $505.00 is forwarded to the USDC for processing. [12480903] (JR) [Entered: 06/27/2022 02:14 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: CKP): Order to show cause docket fee due [12469884] (CKP) [Entered: 06/13/2022 01:45 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Edgar Vasquez opening brief due 08/04/2022. Appellees Michael Carvajal and Felicia Ponce, Warden answering brief due 09/06/2022. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12465515] (RT) [Entered: 06/07/2022 01:18 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.
