Williams v. Paramo, et al.
| JAMES WILLIAMS |
| ROBERT FLOREZ, Correctional Counselor- I, EMANUEL FRIJAS, Correctional Counselor- I, F. ARMENTA, Captain at Donovan Prison, J. HEATHERTON, Classification Chairperson, JOHN AND JANE DOES, Classification Committee Members Between September 27, 2013 through April 2020, TAYLOR GARCIA, Correctional Counselor- II, MICHAEL VILLA FUERTE, Correctional Counselor- II, T. ALHAMBRA, Corrrectional Counselor - I, MICHAEL STOUT, Captain at Donovan Prison, KIMO SMITH, Correctional Counselor- II, JASON MARTINEZ, Captain at Donovan Prison, G. PICKETT, Correctional Counselor- II, ENRIQUE ORTIZ, Captain at Donovan Prison, MARCUS POLLARD, MARK CLAY, Correctional Counselor- I, M. HAGEMANN, Correctional Counselor II and DANIEL PARAMO |
| 24-6700 |
| November 4, 2024 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 23, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis filed by Appellant James Williams. [Entered: 12/23/2024 03:56 PM] |
| Filing 8 RESPONSE to Court Order (DE 5) filed by Appellant James Williams. [Entered: 12/23/2024 03:55 PM] |
| Filing 7 CLERK ACTION: Opening Brief submitted at DE 6 by Appellant James Williams is filed. Original and 6 copies. (briefing remains stayed) [Entered: 12/16/2024 03:03 PM] |
| Filing 6 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellant James Williams. [Entered: 12/16/2024 03:01 PM] |
Filing 5
ORDER FILED. A review of the district courts docket reflects that the district court has certified that this appeal is not taken in good faith and has revoked appellants in forma pauperis status. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(a). This court may dismiss a case at any time, if the court determines the case is frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2). Within 35 days after the date of this order, appellant must: (1) file a motion to dismiss this appeal, see Fed. R. App. P. 42(b), or (2) file a statement explaining why the appeal is not frivolous and should go forward. If appellant files a statement that the appeal should go forward, appellant also must: (1) file in this court a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, OR (2) pay to the district court $605.00 for the filing and docketing fees for this appeal AND file in this court proof that the $605.00 was paid. If appellant does not respond to this order, the Clerk will dismiss this appeal for failure to prosecute, without further notice. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. If appellant files a motion to dismiss the appeal, the Clerk will dismiss this appeal, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b). If appellant submits any response to this order other than a motion to dismiss the appeal, the court may dismiss this appeal as frivolous, without further notice. If the court dismisses the appeal as frivolous, this appeal may be counted as a strike under 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). The briefing schedule for this appeal is stayed. The Clerk will serve on appellant: (1) a form motion to voluntarily dismiss the appeal, (2) a form statement that the appeal should go forward, and (3) a Form 4 financial affidavit. Appellant may use the enclosed forms for any motion to dismiss the appeal, statement that the appeal should go forward, and/or motion to proceed in forma pauperis. [Entered: 11/19/2024 03:54 PM]
|
| Filing 4 District Court Order/Notice Received. [Entered: 11/18/2024 03:15 PM] |
| Filing 3 REFERRAL NOTICE. This matter is referred to the district court for the limited purpose of determining whether in forma pauperis status should continue for this appeal or whether the appeal is frivolous or taken in bad faith. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3); see also Hooker v. American Airlines, 302 F.3d 1091, 1092 (9th Cir. 2002) (revocation of forma pauperis status is appropriate where district court finds the appeal to be frivolous). If the district court elects to revoke in forma pauperis status, the district court is requested to notify this court and the parties of such determination within 21 days of the date of this referral. If the district court does not revoke in forma pauperis status, such status will continue automatically for this appeal pursuant to Fed. R. App. P. 24(a). This referral shall not affect the briefing schedule previously established by this court. [Entered: 11/05/2024 12:53 PM] |
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 12/16/2024. For appeal no. 24-6700, 3:24-cv-00623-TWR-DDL. 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: 11/04/2024 11:18 AM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 3:24-cv-00623-TWR-DDL 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 24-6700 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: 11/04/2024 11:16 AM] |
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.
