Shayla Fite, et al v. Michael Beasley, Jr.
| SHAYLA FITE, an individual and FITE BRAND, LLC, a California limited liability company |
| MICHAEL BEASLEY, Jr., an individual |
| 23-55401 |
| May 1, 2023 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Assault, Libel, and Slander |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 7, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Filed order (Deputy Clerk: MCD): Dismissing case for failure to prosecute (Cir. Rule 42-1) Pursuant to Ninth Circuit Rule 42-1, this appeal is dismissed for failure to file opening brief. This order served on the district court shall, 21 days after the date of the order, act as the mandate of this court. [12788393] (RY) [Entered: 09/07/2023 02:56 PM] |
| Filing 3 Streamlined request [2] by Appellants Shayla Fite and Fite Brand, LLC to extend time to file the brief is approved. Streamline requests allow for only 30 day extensions. Amended briefing schedule: Appellants Shayla Fite and Fite Brand, LLC opening brief due 08/02/2023. [12743200] (DLM) [Entered: 06/26/2023 03:35 PM] |
| Filing 2 Filed (ECF) Streamlined request for extension of time to file Opening Brief by Appellants Shayla Fite and Fite Brand, LLC. New requested due date is 08/04/2023. [12743112] [23-55401] (Williams, Andrew) [Entered: 06/26/2023 02:55 PM] |
| Filing 1 DOCKETED CAUSE AND ENTERED APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL FOR APPELLANT AND NO APPEARANCE FOR APPELLEE. SEND MQ: No. The schedule is set as follows: Appellants Shayla Fite and Fite Brand, LLC opening brief due 07/03/2023. [12706284] (RT) [Entered: 05/01/2023 02:14 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.
