Davis v. General Atomics, et al.
| TERENCE D. DAVIS |
| GENERAL ATOMICS, N/L BLUE, GENERAL ATOMICS AERONAUTICAL SYSTEMS, INC., DANZIG, MINTZ LEVIN COHN FERRIS GLOVSKY AND POPEO, PC, CHARLOTTE ANN ENGSTROM, ROSENBERG SHPALL & ZEIGEN, APLC, NEAL BLUE, DAVID ROSENBERG, LINDEN BLUE, DOES 1-50, KERSTIN ANN-CHARLOTTE ENGSTROM, TOMAS SHPALL, ANNETTE FARNAES, PEARSE EARLY, DENNIS N. BRADY, STEFANO RIZNYK, SAN DIEGO EMPLOYMENT LAW GROUP and SAN DIEGO BIZ LAW, APC |
| 25-3985 |
| June 26, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other Statutory Actions |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on October 17, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 17 MANDATE ISSUED Ryan D. NELSON, Jennifer SUNG, Holly A. THOMAS. The judgment of this Court, entered 9/25/2025, takes effect this date. [Entered: 10/17/2025 10:22 AM] |
Filing 16
ORDER FILED. (Ryan D. NELSON, Jennifer SUNG, Holly A. THOMAS) After considering the responses to the courts August 8, 2025 order and the opening brief, we deny the motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Docket Entry No. 9) and dismiss this appeal as frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(a), (e)(2). No further filings will be entertained in this closed case. DISMISSED. [Entered: 09/25/2025 10:38 AM]
|
| Filing 15 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT pursuant to FRAP 26.1 and CR 26.1-1 filed by Appellee General Atomics. [Entered: 08/29/2025 02:00 PM] |
| Filing 14 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT pursuant to FRAP 26.1 and CR 26.1-1 filed by Appellee General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc.. [Entered: 08/29/2025 01:59 PM] |
| Filing 13 RESPONSE to Order - General OSC (DE 10) filed by Appellee General Atomics, Appellee General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc.. [Entered: 08/29/2025 01:47 PM] |
| Filing 12 RESPONSE to Order - General OSC (DE 10) filed by Appellant Terence D. Davis. [COURT UPDATE: Revised response to court order attached at DE 11.] [Entered: 08/20/2025 02:19 PM] |
| Filing 11 RESPONSE to Order - General OSC (DE 10) filed by Appellant Terence D. Davis. [Entered: 08/20/2025 02:14 PM] |
|
Filing 10
ORDER FILED. It appears that this appeal may be frivolous. If the appeal is frivolous, the court will deny permission to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2). Within 35 days, appellant must: (1) file a statement explaining why the appeal is not frivolous, OR (2) file a motion to voluntarily dismiss the appeal, see Fed. R. App. P. 42(b). If appellant files a statement explaining why the appeal is not frivolous, or any other response other than a motion to dismiss, the court will determine whether the appeal is frivolous. If it is frivolous, the appeal will be dismissed. If it is not frivolous, the appeal will proceed. If appellant files a statement that the appeal should go forward, appellees may file a response within 10 days after service of appellants statement. Briefing is stayed. If appellant does not respond to this order, the court may dismiss this appeal without further notice. The clerk will serve on appellant: (1) a form motion to voluntarily dismiss the appeal, and (2) a form statement that the appeal should go forward. [Entered: 08/08/2025 02:42 PM]
|
| Filing 9 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis filed by Appellant Terence D. Davis. [Entered: 08/04/2025 03:36 PM] |
|
Filing 8
ORDER FILED. Appellants motion to proceed in forma pauperis does not include a completed financial affidavit. Within 21 days, appellant must submit a completed Form 4. If appellant does not do so, the motion to proceed in forma pauperis may be denied. The clerk will serve Form 4 on appellant. [Entered: 07/24/2025 04:20 PM]
|
| Filing 7 Miscellaneous Pro Se Filings Filed [Entered: 07/16/2025 04:30 PM] |
| Filing 6 Physical exhibits (1 copy) received from Appellant Terence D. Davis: miscellaneous unlabeled exhibits on USB drive. Deficiency: Motion required (see attached notice). [Entered: 07/16/2025 02:22 PM] |
| Filing 5 Amended Notice of Appeal Received. [Entered: 07/14/2025 01:31 PM] |
| Filing 4 CLERK ACTION: Opening Brief submitted at DE 3 by Appellant Terence D. Davis is filed. Original and 0 copies. Minor deficiency: Missing certificate of service. (Briefing remains stayed) [Entered: 07/08/2025 04:14 PM] [Edited: 07/08/2025 04:15 PM] |
| Filing 3 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellant Terence D. Davis. [Entered: 07/08/2025 04:12 PM] |
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 8/5/2025, Appeal Answering Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellee) 9/5/2025. For appeal no. 25-3985, 8:23-cv-00132-WLH-JDE. 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: 06/26/2025 01:41 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 8:23-cv-00132-WLH-JDE 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 25-3985 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: 06/26/2025 01:37 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.
