Woodward v. Bennett
| ROBERT LUCAS WOODWARD |
| JASON BENNETT, Superintendent, Stafford Creek Corrections Center |
| 25-310 |
| January 16, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 3, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 9 MOTION for Certificate of Appealability filed by Appellant Robert Lucas Woodward. [Entered: 03/04/2025 10:43 AM] |
| Filing 8 Miscellaneous Pro Se Filings Filed [Entered: 03/04/2025 10:42 AM] |
Filing 7
ORDER FILED. On February 24, 2025, the district court resolved the post-judgment motion. The stay of proceedings is therefore lifted and this request for a certificate of appealability will proceed. [Entered: 02/28/2025 11:55 AM]
|
| Filing 6 District Court Order/Notice Received. [Entered: 02/27/2025 04:15 PM] |
| Filing 5 Amended Notice of Appeal Received. [Entered: 02/19/2025 05:15 PM] |
|
Filing 4
ORDER FILED. The court will not require appellant to submit a disclosure statement under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 26.1 and Ninth Circuit Rule 26.1-1. Appellants related motion (Docket Entry No. 3) to appoint counsel and extend time is therefore unnecessary. Proceedings in this court other than mediation are stayed until the district court rules on the timely tolling motion filed on January 14, 2025. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4); Leader Natl Ins. Co. v. Indus. Indem. Ins. Co., 19 F.3d 444, 445 (9th Cir. 1994). The clerk will send a copy of this order to the district judge. [Entered: 02/06/2025 04:09 PM]
|
| Filing 3 MOTION for Appointment of Counsel and Extension of Time to File Disclosure Statement filed by Appellant Robert Lucas Woodward. [Entered: 02/06/2025 02:24 PM] |
| Filing 2 COA SCHEDULE NOTICE. Needs a certificate of appealability. Date COA denied in DC: 01/06/2025. [Entered: 01/16/2025 02:30 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 3:24-cv-05442-BJR 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 25-310 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: 01/16/2025 02:29 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.
| Search for this case: Woodward v. Bennett | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Petitioner: ROBERT LUCAS WOODWARD | |
| Represented By: | Robert Lucas Woodward |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: JASON BENNETT, Superintendent, Stafford Creek Corrections Center | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
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.
