Collins v. Bravo, et al.
| RONALD W. COLLINS |
| ALEX BRAVO, TANISHA MULHEAD HENRY and PATRICK MOREDA |
| 25-1844 |
| March 20, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 9, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 16
ORDER FILED. The motion (Docket Entry No. 15) for an extension of time to file the opening brief is granted. The opening brief is due November 4, 2025. The answering brief is due December 4, 2025. The optional reply brief is due 21 days after the answering brief is served. To facilitate timely submission of cases for decision, no further motions for extensions of time to file the opening brief will be granted absent extraordinary and compelling circumstances. Failure to file the opening brief by November 4, 2025 may result in dismissal of this case for failure to prosecute. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. [Entered: 09/09/2025 02:11 PM]
|
| Filing 15 MOTION to Extend Time to File Brief filed by Appellant Alex Bravo, Appellant Patrick Moreda. [Entered: 09/05/2025 10:27 AM] |
|
Filing 14
ORDER FILED. The motion (Docket Entry No. 13) for an extension of time to file the opening brief is granted. The opening brief is due September 5, 2025. The answering brief is due October 6, 2025. The optional reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [Entered: 07/03/2025 03:54 PM]
|
| Filing 13 MOTION to Extend Time to File Brief filed by Appellant Alex Bravo, Appellant Patrick Moreda. [Entered: 06/30/2025 05:16 PM] |
|
Filing 12
ORDER FILED. Lisa B. Fitzgerald, Appellate Commissioner. Appellants response to the March 26, 2025 order notes that the district court did not enter its October 11, 2024 order on the docket until October 15, 2024. The November 12, 2024 motion for reconsideration was therefore filed within 28 days of the challenged order. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4). Appellees motion (Docket Entry No. 10) to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction is denied, though appellee may raise the arguments again in the answering brief. See Natl Indus. v. Republic Natl Life Ins. Co., 677 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1982) (merits panel may consider appellate jurisdiction despite earlier denial of motion to dismiss). The opening brief is due July 7, 2025. The answering brief is due August 6, 2025. The optional reply brief is due within 21 days after the answering brief is served. [Entered: 06/05/2025 04:29 PM]
|
| Filing 11 RESPONSE to Motion to Dismiss (DE 10) filed by Appellant Alex Bravo, Appellant Patrick Moreda. [Entered: 05/27/2025 04:15 PM] |
| Filing 10 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Appellee Ronald W. Collins. [Entered: 05/12/2025 02:29 PM] |
| Filing 9 MOTION to Extend Time to File Brief filed by Appellant Alex Bravo, Appellant Patrick Moreda. [Entered: 04/25/2025 08:42 AM] |
| Filing 8 RESPONSE to Order - General OSC (DE 6) filed by Appellant Alex Bravo, Appellant Patrick Moreda. [Entered: 04/11/2025 03:08 PM] |
| Filing 7 RELEASED FROM MEDIATION. This case is released from the Mediation Program. Counsel are requested to contact the Circuit Mediator should circumstances develop that warrant settlement discussions. [Entered: 04/03/2025 10:46 AM] |
|
Filing 6
ORDER FILED. The notice of appeal was not filed within 30 days after the district courts October 11, 2024 order. See 28 U.S.C. 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). Appellants filed a motion for reconsideration on November 11, 2024, but that motion does not appear to be a timely tolling motion under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(4). Accordingly, to the extent that appellants challenge the October 11, 2024, the court may lack jurisdiction over this appeal. See United States v. Sadler, 480 F.3d 932, 937 (9th Cir. 2007) (requirement of timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional). The notice of appeal was filed within 30 days after the district courts March 10, 2025 order denying the motion for reconsideration. But the court may lack jurisdiction over a challenge to the March 10, 2025 under the collateral order doctrine. And, even if the court has jurisdiction over such a challenge, the appeal may be appropriate for summary disposition. See United States v. Hooton, 693 F.2d 857, 858 (9th Cir. 1982). Within 21 days, appellants must either file a motion to voluntarily dismiss this appeal or file a statement explaining why it should not be dismissed. If appellants elect to file a statement, they must include an explanation for whyif the scope of this appeal is limited to review of the district courts March 10, 2025 orderthe issues to be raised in this appeal are substantial enough to justify full briefing. If appellants do not do so, the court will dismiss the appeal. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. If appellants file a statement, appellee may file a response within 10 days. Briefing is stayed. [Entered: 03/26/2025 12:02 PM]
|
| Filing 5 MEDIATION QUESTIONNAIRE filed by Appellant Alex Bravo, Appellant Patrick Moreda. 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: 03/25/2025 12:15 PM] |
| Filing 4 Attorney Chris Davis as Counsel for Appellant substituted for Attorney Samuel Pezone. [Entered: 03/25/2025 12:07 PM] |
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Chris Davis for Appellant Alex Bravo, Appellant Patrick Moreda replacing Samuel Pezone. [Entered: 03/25/2025 10:08 AM] |
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Mediation Questionnaire due (Appellant) 3/25/2025, Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 4/29/2025, Appeal Answering Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellee) 5/29/2025. For appeal no. 25-1844, 2:23-cv-01812-GMN-MDC. 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: 03/20/2025 02:29 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 2:23-cv-01812-GMN-MDC 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 25-1844 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: 03/20/2025 02:25 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.
