Sharif v. Swindling, et al.
Plaintiff: MUHSIN SHARIF
Defendant: ALEX SWINDLING, JOHN AND JANE DOES, 1-3, Police Officers with the Eugene Police Department, ALEC SWINDLING and CITY OF EUGENE
Case Number: 24-3153
Filed: May 16, 2024
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Other
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on May 16, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
May 16, 2024 Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Mediation Questionnaire due (Appellant) 5/21/2024, Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 6/25/2024, Appeal Answering Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellee) 7/25/2024. All briefs shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 31 and 9th Cir. R. 31-2.1. Failure of the petitioner(s)/appellant(s) to comply with this briefing schedule will result in automatic dismissal of the appeal. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. [Entered: 05/16/2024 04:06 PM]
May 16, 2024 Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 6:22-cv-01522-MK has been received in the Clerk's office of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 24-3153 has been assigned to this case. All communications with the court must indicate this Court of Appeals docket number. Please carefully review the docket to ensure the name(s) and contact information are correct. It is your responsibility to alert the court if your contact information changes. Resources Available For more information about case processing and to assist you in preparing your brief, please review the Case Opening Information (for #attorneys and #pro se litigants) and review the #Appellate Practice Guide. Counsel should consider contacting the court's #Appellate Mentoring Program for help with the brief and argument. [Entered: 05/16/2024 04:02 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.

Search for this case: Sharif v. Swindling, 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: MUHSIN SHARIF
Represented By: Mr. Thomas H. Nelson
Represented By: Mr. Brandon B. Mayfield
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: ALEX SWINDLING
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: JOHN AND JANE DOES, 1-3, Police Officers with the Eugene Police Department
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: ALEC SWINDLING
Represented By: Benjamin James Miller
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: CITY OF EUGENE
Represented By: Benjamin James Miller
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?