John Fullen v. Scott Mascher, et al
Plaintiff / Appellant: JOHN HOYT FULLEN, AKA John Fullen
Defendant / Appellee: SCOTT MASCHER, Sheriff at Yavapai County Detention, JEFF NEWNUM, Captain at Yavapai County Detention, BARBEY, First Name Unknown, Sgt. at Yavapai County Detention, YAVAPAI COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS and SHEILA POLK, Board Supervisor at Yavapai County Board of Supervisors
Case Number: 23-15381
Filed: March 15, 2023
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Prison Condition
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 8, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 8, 2023 Filing 12 Filed Appellant John Hoyt Fullen motion to extend time to file appellant opening brief until 05/26/2023. Deficiencies: None. Served on 05/03/2023. [12713012] (BJK) [Entered: 05/10/2023 12:14 PM]
May 8, 2023 Filing 11 Filed original and 0 copies of Appellant John Hoyt Fullen opening brief of 13 pages (Informal: Yes). Served on 05/03/2023. (briefing remains stayed) [12710976] (KT) [Entered: 05/08/2023 01:39 PM]
April 13, 2023 Filing 10 Added Attorney(s) Nicholas D. Acedo for party(s) Appellee Scott Mascher, Appellee Barbey and Appellee Jeff Newnum, in case 23-15381. [12695232] (QDL) [Entered: 04/13/2023 01:54 PM]
April 13, 2023 Filing 9 Filed (ECF) notice of appearance of Nicholas D. Acedo (Struck Love Bojanowski & Acedo, 3100 West Ray Road, Suite 300, Chandler, Arizona 85226) for Appellees Scott Mascher, Jeff Newnum and Barbey. Date of service: 04/13/2023. (Party was previously proceeding with counsel.) [12695219] [23-15381] (Acedo, Nicholas) [Entered: 04/13/2023 01:44 PM]
April 7, 2023 Filing 8 Filed Appellant John Hoyt Fullen motion to proceed In Forma Pauperis. Deficiencies: None. Served on 04/03/2023. [12692799] (BJK) [Entered: 04/10/2023 04:59 PM]
April 7, 2023 Filing 7 Received Appellant John Hoyt Fullen response to 3/28/23 order-statement that appeal should go forward. Served on 04/03/2023. [12692797] (BJK) [Entered: 04/10/2023 04:56 PM]
March 28, 2023 Filing 6 Streamlined request by Appellant John Hoyt Fullen 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. [12683771] (DR) [Entered: 03/28/2023 02:06 PM]
March 28, 2023 Filing 4 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: JW): A review of the district courts docket reflects that the district court has certified that this appeal is not taken in good faith and has revoked appellants in forma pauperis status. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(a). This court may dismiss a case at any time, if the court determines the case is frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2). Within 35 days after the date of this order, appellant must: (1) file a motion to dismiss this appeal, see Fed. R. App. P. 42(b), or (2) file a statement explaining why the appeal is not frivolous and should go forward. If appellant files a statement that the appeal should go forward, appellant also must: (1) file in this court a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, OR (2) pay to the district court $505.00 for the filing and docketing fees for this appeal AND file in this court proof that the $505.00 was paid. If appellant does not respond to this order, the Clerk will dismiss this appeal for failure to prosecute, without further notice. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. If appellant files a motion to dismiss the appeal, the Clerk will dismiss this appeal, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b). If appellant submits any response to this order other than a motion to dismiss the appeal, the court may dismiss this appeal as frivolous, without further notice. If the court dismisses the appeal as frivolous, this appeal may be counted as a strike under 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). If appellant files a statement that the appeal should go forward, appellees may file a response within 10 days after service of appellants statement. The briefing schedule for this appeal is stayed. The Clerk will serve on appellant: (1) a form motion to voluntarily dismiss the appeal, (2) a form statement that the appeal should go forward, and (3) a Form 4 financial affidavit. Appellant may use the enclosed forms for any motion to dismiss the appeal, statement that the appeal should go forward, and/or motion to proceed in forma pauperis. [12683312] (CKP) [Entered: 03/28/2023 09:35 AM]
March 27, 2023 Filing 5 Filed Appellant John Hoyt Fullen motion to appoint pro bono counsel. Deficiencies: None. Served on 03/23/2023. [12683648] (BJK) [Entered: 03/28/2023 12:40 PM]
March 24, 2023 Filing 3 Received copy of District Court order filed on 03/24/2023 revoking plaintiff's IFP status. [12682324] (BJK) [Entered: 03/27/2023 10:56 AM]
March 16, 2023 Filing 2 Filed referral notice (Deputy Clerk:CKP): Referring to the district court for determination whether in forma pauperis status should continue for this appeal. [12675166] (CKP) [Entered: 03/16/2023 08:59 AM]
March 15, 2023 Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL AND PRO SE APPELLANT. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant John Hoyt Fullen opening brief due 05/12/2023. Appellees Barbey, Scott Mascher, Jeff Newnum, Sheila Polk and Yavapai County Board of Supervisors answering brief due 06/12/2023. Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [12674396] (JMR) [Entered: 03/15/2023 09:43 AM]

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: John Fullen v. Scott Mascher, et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff / appellant: JOHN HOYT FULLEN, AKA John Fullen
Represented By: John Hoyt Fullen
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: SCOTT MASCHER, Sheriff at Yavapai County Detention
Represented By: Ashlee B. Hesman
Represented By: Nicholas D. Acedo 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 ]
Defendant / appellee: JEFF NEWNUM, Captain at Yavapai County Detention
Represented By: Ashlee B. Hesman
Represented By: Nicholas D. Acedo 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 ]
Defendant / appellee: BARBEY, First Name Unknown, Sgt. at Yavapai County Detention
Represented By: Ashlee B. Hesman
Represented By: Nicholas D. Acedo 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 ]
Defendant / appellee: YAVAPAI COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
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: SHEILA POLK, Board Supervisor at Yavapai County Board of Supervisors
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?