Ryan Dearman v. Elizabeth Olivera, et al
Plaintiff / Appellant: RYAN ALAN DEARMAN
Defendant / Appellee: ELIZABETH UFKES OLIVERA, BRADLEY MORROW, JOE GAROFALO and COUNTY OF COLUSA
Case Number: 23-16015
Filed: July 19, 2023
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on September 1, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
September 1, 2023 Filing 10 Filed Appellant Ryan Alan Dearman Statement that appeal should go forward. [12785716] (HH) [Entered: 09/01/2023 04:15 PM]
August 7, 2023 Filing 9 Streamlined request by Appellant Ryan Alan Dearman to extend time to file the brief is not approved because it is unnecessary. The briefing schedule for this appeal is stayed per Clerk Order filed 08/01/2023. [Docket 5} [12769717] (DLM) [Entered: 08/07/2023 03:24 PM]
August 7, 2023 Filing 8 Filed Appellant Ryan Alan Dearman "Issues on appeal." Paper filing deficiency: None. [12769694] (HH) [Entered: 08/07/2023 03:12 PM]
August 7, 2023 Filing 7 Filed Appellant Ryan Alan Dearman motion to proceed In Forma Pauperis. Deficiencies: None. Served on 08/02/2023. [12769692] (HH) [Entered: 08/07/2023 03:10 PM]
August 7, 2023 Filing 6 Filed Appellant Ryan Alan Dearman motion to appoint counsel. Deficiencies: None. Served on. [12769686] (HH) [Entered: 08/07/2023 03:09 PM]
August 1, 2023 Filing 5 Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: MCD): A review of the district courts docket reflects that the district court has certified that this appeal is frivolous and 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. The briefing schedule for this appeal is stayed. The Clerk shall 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. [12766084] (CKP) [Entered: 08/01/2023 02:38 PM]
July 25, 2023 Filing 4 Received copy of District Court order filed on 07/24/2023: Ordering plaintiff's in forma pauperis on appeal is revoked. [12761465] (HH) [Entered: 07/25/2023 10:27 AM]
July 19, 2023 Filing 3 Received copy of amended notice of appeal from district court. [12758159] (NAC) [Entered: 07/19/2023 01:39 PM]
July 19, 2023 Filing 2 Filed referral notice (Deputy Clerk: MCD: Referring to the district court for determination whether in forma pauperis status should continue for this appeal. [12758028] (CKP) [Entered: 07/19/2023 12:07 PM]
July 19, 2023 Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCE OF PRO SE APPELLANT AND NO APPEARANCE FOR APPELLEES.. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellant Ryan Alan Dearman opening brief due 09/11/2023. [12757843] (JMR) [Entered: 07/19/2023 10:14 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: Ryan Dearman v. Elizabeth Olivera, 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: RYAN ALAN DEARMAN
Represented By: Ryan Alan Dearman
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: ELIZABETH UFKES OLIVERA
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: BRADLEY MORROW
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: JOE GAROFALO
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: COUNTY OF COLUSA
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?