Joshua Conger v. Scott Van Schoten, et al
| JOSHUA WADE CONGER |
| SCOTT VAN SCHOTEN, ROBERT HAMPTON and BOAVIDA COMMUNITIES |
| 23-35325 |
| May 10, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Tort Product Liability |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 26, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 MANDATE ISSUED. (JHN, MTF and JS) [12742554] (HH) [Entered: 06/26/2023 09:25 AM] |
| Filing 3 Mail returned on 06/13/2023 addressed to Joshua Wade Conger, re: [ # 1 ] Case Opening Document. Returned envelope notes: Return to sender, unable to forward. Resending to: case files; no forwarding address found [12739295] (JBS) [Entered: 06/20/2023 02:54 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed order (JACQUELINE H. NGUYEN, MICHELLE T. FRIEDLAND and JENNIFER SUNG) A review of the record demonstrates that this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because the order challenged in the appeal is not final or appealable. See WMX Techs., Inc. v. Miller, 104 F.3d 1133, 1136 (9th Cir. 1997) (en banc) (dismissal of complaint with leave to amend is not appealable); see also 28 U.S.C. 1291; Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328 (9th Cir. 1986) (denial of appointment of counsel in civil case is not appealable). Consequently, this appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. DISMISSED. [12727591] (WL) [Entered: 06/02/2023 01:52 PM] |
| 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 Joshua Wade Conger opening brief due 07/07/2023. [12712800] (JMR) [Entered: 05/10/2023 09:46 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.
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.
