Estate of Anthony Ray Lopez Sr., et al. v. City of Ontario, et al.
| ANTHONY RAY LOPEZ, JR., individually, ESTATE OF JOSEPHINE GUADALUPE DOMINGUEZ, by and through her successor in interest, Laura Beltran, ESTATE OF MADELINE VASQUEZ, by and through her successors in interest, Frances Velasquez and Albert Velasquez, FRANCES VELASQUEZ, individually, ESTATE OF ANTHONY RAY LOPEZ SR., by and through his successors in interest, Lorina Lopez and Anthony Ray Lopez Jr., LORINA LOPEZ, individually, ALBERT VELASQUEZ, individually and LAURA BELTRAN, individually |
| CITY OF ONTARIO, a public entity, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, a public entity, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, BRENDON BRIGGS, individually and DOES, Doe Ontario Employees; Doe San Bernardino Employees; Doe State Employees; Does 1-10, individually |
| 24-5169 |
| August 22, 2024 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| ESTATE OF ANTHONY RAY LOPEZ SR., ET AL. V. CITY OF ONTARIO, ET AL. |
| ESTATE OF ANTHONY RAY LOPEZ SR., ET AL. V. CITY OF ONTARIO, ET AL. |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 23, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER FILED. The court has received appellants response to the August 26, 2024 order. This appeal will proceed. The opening brief is due October 21, 2024. The answering brief is due November 21, 2024. The optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [Entered: 09/23/2024 01:36 PM]
|
| Filing 9 RELEASED FROM MEDIATION (text only). This case is released from the Mediation Program. Counsel are requested to contact the Circuit Mediator should circumstances develop that warrant settlement discussions. [Entered: 09/19/2024 03:26 PM] |
| Filing 8 ADDED Counsel for Appellee Laurel Hoehn for Appellee Brendon Briggs, Appellee County of San Bernardino. [Entered: 09/17/2024 01:40 PM] |
| Filing 7 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Laurel Hoehn for Appellee Brendon Briggs, Appellee County of San Bernardino. [Entered: 09/17/2024 01:12 PM] |
| Filing 6 RESPONSE to Order - No Final Order General (DE 3) filed by Appellant Estate of Anthony Ray Lopez Sr., Appellant Estate of Madeline Vasquez, Appellant Estate of Josephine Guadalupe Dominguez, Appellant Lorina Lopez, Appellant Anthony Ray Lopez, Jr., Appellant Frances Velasquez, Appellant Albert Velasquez, Appellant Laura Beltran. [Entered: 09/16/2024 10:10 PM] |
| Filing 5 MEDIATION CONFERENCE SCHEDULED - DIAL-IN Assessment Conference, 9/19/2024, 11:00 a.m. PACIFIC Time. See order for instructions and details. [Entered: 09/09/2024 11:19 AM] |
| Filing 4 MEDIATION QUESTIONNAIRE filed by Appellant Estate of Anthony Ray Lopez Sr., Appellant Estate of Madeline Vasquez, Appellant Estate of Josephine Guadalupe Dominguez, Appellant Lorina Lopez, Appellant Anthony Ray Lopez, Jr., Appellant Frances Velasquez, Appellant Albert Velasquez, Appellant Laura Beltran. To submit pertinent confidential information directly to the Circuit Mediators, please email #[email protected] and include the case name and number in the subject line. Confidential submissions may include any information relevant to mediation of the case and settlement potential, including, but not limited to, settlement history, ongoing or potential settlement discussions, non-litigated party related issues, other pending actions, and timing considerations that may impact mediation efforts. [Entered: 08/27/2024 08:47 PM] |
|
Filing 3
ORDER FILED. A district court order is not appealable under 28 U.S.C. 1291 unless it disposes of all claims as to all parties or unless judgment is entered in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b). Romoland Sch. Dist. v. Inland Empire Energy Ctr., LLC, 548 F.3d 738, 747 (9th Cir. 2008) (citing Chacon v. Babcock, 640 F.2d 221, 222 (9th Cir. 1981)); see also 28 U.S.C. 1291; Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b). This court may therefore lack jurisdiction over this appeal. Within 21 days, appellants must either file a statement explaining why the appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction or move for voluntary dismissal of the appeal. If appellants do not comply with this order, the court will dismiss this appeal. See Ninth Circuit Rule 42-1. If appellants file a statement, a response may be filed within 10 days. Briefing is stayed. [Entered: 08/26/2024 02:21 PM]
|
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Mediation Questionnaire due (Appellant) 8/27/2024, Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 10/7/2024, Appeal Answering Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellee) 11/7/2024. For appeal no. 24-5169, 5:23-cv-02304-SSS-SP. 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: 08/22/2024 02:58 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 5:23-cv-02304-SSS-SP 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 24-5169 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: 08/22/2024 02:55 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the U.S. 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.
