Baghirzade v. Armenian National Committee of America, et al.
| AYNUR BAGHIRZADE |
| ARMENIAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE OF AMERICA, a non-profit corporation, ARAM HAMPARIAN, an individual, ARMENIAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE OF AMERICAN WESTERN REGION, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation, ARMEN SAHAKYAN, an individual, YELP INC., a Delaware stock corporation, JEREMY STOPPELMAN, an individual, GOOGLE INC., a Delaware limited liability company, ALPHABET INC., a Delaware stock corporation, ORANGE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION, a California Nonprofit Mutual Benefit Corporation, TRUDY LEVINDOFSKE, an individual, TERESA VUKI, an individual, LOS ANGELES COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION, a California Nonprofit Mutual Benefit Corporation, LOS ANGELES COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION SMARTLAW LAWYER REFERRAL SERVICES, SETH CHAVEZ, an individual, COCO SU, an individual, ATTORNEY SEARCH NETWORK, a California Stock Corporation, JAKE BALOIAN, an individual, ESTRELLA SANCHEZ, NOLO, MH SUB I, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, LEGAL MATCH CALIFORNIA, a Nevada Domestic Corporation also known as LegalMatch, YOUTUBE, LLC, SUNDAR PICHAI, ZARTONK MEDIA, LLC, ZAVEN KOUROGHLIAN, VAN DER MEGERDICHIAN, HAIRENIK ASSOCIATION, a non-profit corporation, ANI TCHAGLASIAN, LEGALSHIELD, PARKER STANBURY, LLP, GREYSTAR, INC., KIA AMERICA, INC and DOES, 1 through 300; 1 through 289 |
| 25-2087 |
| April 1, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on May 20, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 5 MANDATE ISSUED A. Wallace TASHIMA, John B. OWENS, Roopali H. DESAI [Entered: 05/20/2025 10:49 AM] |
| Filing 4 MAIL RETURNED. DE 2 addressed to Counsel Adrianos Facchetti. Action taken: none (counsel registered for E-filing). [Entered: 04/30/2025 03:12 PM] |
Filing 3
ORDER FILED. (A. Wallace TASHIMA, John B. OWENS, Roopali H. DESAI) This court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal because the February 27, 2025 order challenged in the notice of appeal was not final or immediately appealable. See 28 U.S.C. 1291; United States v. Washington, 573 F.2d 1121, 1122 (9th Cir. 1978) (order denying motion to disqualify judge is not final or appealable). This appeal is therefore dismissed. See 9th Cir. R. 3-6(b) (if court determines it lacks jurisdiction, court may dismiss appeal without notice or further proceedings). DISMISSED. [Entered: 04/28/2025 10:36 AM]
|
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 5/16/2025, Appeal Answering Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellee) 6/16/2025. For appeal no. 25-2087, 3:24-cv-01077-RSH-MMP. 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: 04/01/2025 11:40 AM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 3:24-cv-01077-RSH-MMP 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 25-2087 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: 04/01/2025 11:37 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.