Beard, et al. v. County of Stanislaus, et al.
| HILDA PEREZ, N. P. and SHANE BEARD |
| SHYNELLE JONES, GLORIA SOLORIO, COUNTY OF STANISLAUS, APRIL COBBS, STEPHANIE HERRERA, ERIC ANDERSON, SHARI JOHNSON, MARIELA GOMEZ and DAVID GRANADOS |
| 24-5782 |
| September 23, 2024 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 2, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 MEDIATION CONFERENCE SCHEDULED - DIAL-IN Assessment Conference, 10/07/2024, 11:00 a.m. PACIFIC Time. See order for instructions and details. [24-5779, 24-5782] [Entered: 10/02/2024 12:01 PM] |
| Filing 4 MEDIATION QUESTIONNAIRE filed by Appellee County of Stanislaus, Appellee Eric Anderson, Appellee April Cobbs, Appellee Mariela Gomez, Appellee David Granados, Appellee Stephanie Herrera, Appellee Shari Johnson, Appellee Shynelle Jones, Appellee Gloria Solorio. 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. [24-5782, 24-5779] [Entered: 10/01/2024 02:27 PM] |
| Filing 3 MEDIATION QUESTIONNAIRE filed by Appellant Shane Beard, Appellant Hilda Perez, Appellant N. P.. 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. [24-5782, 24-5779] [Entered: 09/27/2024 11:36 AM] |
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Mediation Questionnaire due 9/30/2024, Appeal Transcript Order Due 10/2/2024, Appeal Transcript Due 11/1/2024, Cross Appeal First Brief Due 12/11/2024, Cross Appeal Second Brief Due 1/10/2025, Cross Appeal Third Brief Due 2/10/2025. For appeal no. 24-5782, 1:21-cv-00841-JAM-CSK. 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 [24-5782, 24-5779] [Entered: 09/23/2024 03:35 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 1:21-cv-00841-JAM-CSK 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 24-5782 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: 09/23/2024 03:22 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.
