Johnson v. United States District Court for the District of Arizona, Phoenix
| WARREN JOHNSON |
| UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA, PHOENIX |
| EARLY WARNING SERVICES, LLC |
| 25-3212 |
| May 20, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 28, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 13
ORDER FILED. William A. FLETCHER, Consuelo M. CALLAHAN, Lucy H. KOH The motion (Docket Entry No. 10) for a stay is denied. Petitioners motion (Docket Entry No. 12) for reconsideration of the order denying a petition for a writ of mandamus is denied. No further filings will be entertained in this closed case. [Entered: 05/28/2025 08:51 AM]
|
| Filing 12 MOTION to Reconsider Dispositive Order filed by Petitioner Warren Johnson. [Court entered filing to correct DE 11] [Entered: 05/27/2025 03:36 PM] |
| Filing 11 DEFECTIVE --- PETITION FOR PANEL REHEARING filed by Petitioner Warren Johnson. [Wrong filing type used, corrected in DE 12] [Entered: 05/27/2025 08:26 AM] [Edited: 05/27/2025 03:37 PM] |
| Filing 10 MOTION to Stay Lower Court or Agency Proceedings/Order/Judgment filed by Petitioner Warren Johnson. [Court entered filing, PDF from DE 8] [Entered: 05/23/2025 11:27 AM] |
|
Filing 9
ORDER FILED. (William A. FLETCHER, Consuelo M. CALLAHAN, Lucy H. KOH) Petitioner has not demonstrated a clear and indisputable right to the extraordinary remedy of mandamus. See In re Mersho, 6 F.4th 891, 897 (9th Cir. 2021) (To determine whether a writ of mandamus should be granted, we weigh the five factors outlined in Bauman v. United States District Court.); Bauman v. U.S. Dist. Court, 557 F.2d 650 (9th Cir. 1977). The petition is denied. The motion (Docket Entry No. 5) to file documents under seal is granted. The motion to expedite (Docket Entry No. 6) is denied as moot. DENIED. [Entered: 05/23/2025 09:36 AM] [Edited: 05/23/2025 09:41 AM]
|
| Filing 8 Emergency MOTION Circuit Rule 27-3 Certificate filed by Petitioner Warren Johnson. [Entered: 05/23/2025 09:33 AM] |
| Filing 7 MOTION to Supplement or Correct Record filed by Petitioner Warren Johnson. [Entered: 05/22/2025 07:49 PM] |
| Filing 5 MOTION to File Document Under Seal and Sealed Document Submitted for Filing filed by Petitioner Warren Johnson. [Entered: 05/22/2025 06:55 AM] |
| Filing 6 MOTION to Expedite filed by Petitioner Warren Johnson. [Court entered filing to correct DE 4] [Entered: 05/22/2025 11:28 AM] |
| Filing 4 DEFECTIVE --- Emergency MOTION Circuit Rule 27-3 Certificate filed by Petitioner Warren Johnson. [Wrong filing type used, corrected in DE 6] [Entered: 05/21/2025 08:06 AM] [Edited: 05/22/2025 11:28 AM] |
| Filing 3 SCHEDULE NOTICE for Petition for a Writ of Mandamus and-or Prohibition. [Entered: 05/20/2025 10:55 AM] |
| Filing 2 CASE OPENED. Your case opening documents have been received in the Clerk's office of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on 5/18/2025. The U.S. Court of Appeals docket number 25-3212 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 #Appellate Practice Guide. Attorneys should consider the court's #Appellate Mentoring Program for assistance. [Entered: 05/20/2025 10:52 AM] |
| Filing 1 PETITION for a Writ of Mandamus and/or Prohibition filed by Petitioner Warren Johnson. [Entered: 05/20/2025 10:48 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.
