McCollough v. Portland State University, et al.
| CHAL JAMISON MCCOLLOUGH |
| SUSAN JEFFORDS, of Portland State University and PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY, c/o Ann Cudd |
| 24-7617 |
| December 18, 2024 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Opinions
We have the following opinions for this case:
| Description |
|---|
| MCCOLLOUGH V. PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY, ET AL.Portland, OregonCivilNguyen, Jacqueline H., Owens, John B., Lee, Kenneth K. |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 2, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 6 CLERK ACTION: Opening Brief submitted at DE 5 by Appellant Chal Jamison McCollough is filed. No paper copies are required at this time. [Entered: 01/02/2025 09:57 AM] |
| Filing 5 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellant Chal Jamison McCollough. [Entered: 12/30/2024 03:43 PM] [Edited: 01/02/2025 09:56 AM] |
Filing 4
District Court Order/Notice Received. Plaintiff moves for reconsideration (ECF 35 ) of the Court's Order (ECF 33 ) adopting the Findings and Recommendation (ECF 29 ) granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF 18 ). Under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a motion for reconsideration may be granted for the following reasons: "(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence... ; (3) fraud... by an opposing party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has been satisfied... or (6) any other reason that justifies relief." Reconsideration "is appropriate only in very limited circumstances," Shalit v. Coppe, 182 F.3d 1124, 1132 (9th Cir. 1999), and "motions for reconsideration are not the proper vehicles for rehashing old arguments," Phillips v. C.R. Bard, Inc., 290 F.R.D. 615, 670 (D. Nev. 2013) (cleaned up). Plaintiff does not argue that any of the Rule 60(b) factors are met and mainly restates his prior arguments. The Court thus DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration, ECF 35 . Plaintiff also moves for leave to appeal in forma pauperis (ECF 37 ). This motion must be filed with and decided by the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit has forms available on the internet, including forms to appeal in forma pauperis. These forms are available at https://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/forms/. The Court therefore STRIKES Plaintiff's motion to appeal in forma pauperis (ECF 37 ) filed in this Court. Ordered by Judge Michael H. Simon. [Entered: 12/26/2024 11:42 AM]
|
| 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: 12/19/2024 10:57 AM] |
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 1/27/2025, Appeal Answering Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellee) 2/26/2025. For appeal no. 24-7617, 3:23-cv-01582-AR. 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: 12/18/2024 01:54 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 3:23-cv-01582-AR 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 24-7617 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. Attorneys should consider contacting the court's #Appellate Mentoring Program for help with the brief and argument. [Entered: 12/18/2024 01:47 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.
