James v. Taylor
| JOHN FREDERICK JAMES, JR. |
| JACOB TAYLOR, an employee of Oregon DSL |
| 25-6024 |
| September 24, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Marine Contract Actions |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 17, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 10 MANDATE ISSUED Barry G. SILVERMAN, Richard C. TALLMAN, Patrick J. BUMATAY. The judgment of this Court, entered 11/25/2025, takes effect this date. [Entered: 12/17/2025 08:23 AM] |
Filing 9
ORDER FILED. (Barry G. SILVERMAN, Richard C. TALLMAN, Patrick J. BUMATAY) The notice of appeal was filed more than 30 days after the district court entered judgment on August 13, 2025. See 28 U.S.C. 2107(a); United States v. Sadler, 480 F.3d 932, 937 (9th Cir. 2007) (requirement of timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional). This appeal is therefore dismissed. All pending motions are denied as moot. DISMISSED. [Entered: 11/25/2025 10:35 AM]
|
| Filing 8 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellant John Frederick James. [Entered: 10/28/2025 08:09 AM] |
| Filing 7 MOTION to Extend Time to File Brief filed by Appellant John Frederick James. [Entered: 10/27/2025 03:49 PM] [Edited: 10/28/2025 09:37 AM] |
| Filing 6 Attorney Denise Gale Fjordbeck as Counsel for Appellee substituted for Attorney Nicole DeFever. [Entered: 10/22/2025 09:41 AM] |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Denise Gale Fjordbeck for Appellee Jacob Taylor replacing Nicole DeFever. [Entered: 10/22/2025 09:31 AM] |
| Filing 4 RESPONSE to Order - Order to Show Cause (OSC) (DE 3) filed by Appellant John Frederick James. [Court Update to Attach Corrected PDF] [Entered: 10/17/2025 12:48 PM] [Edited: 10/20/2025 09:32 AM] |
|
Filing 3
ORDER FILED. The notice of appeal was not filed within 30 days after the district court entered judgment on August 13, 2025. See 28 U.S.C. 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). The court may therefore 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); see also Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), (a)(6); 26(b)(1) (only the district court can extend the time to file a notice of appeal). Within 21 days, appellant must either file a motion to voluntarily dismiss this appeal or file a statement explaining why it should not be dismissed. If appellant does not do so, the court will dismiss the appeal. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. If appellant files a statement, appellee may file a response within 10 days. Briefing is stayed. [Entered: 09/29/2025 03:37 PM]
|
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 11/3/2025, Appeal Answering Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellee) 12/3/2025. For appeal no. 25-6024, 3:24-cv-02012-YY. 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: 09/24/2025 04:15 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 3:24-cv-02012-YY 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 25-6024 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: 09/24/2025 04:05 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: James v. Taylor | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: JOHN FREDERICK JAMES, JR. | |
| Represented By: | John Frederick James, Jr |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: JACOB TAYLOR, an employee of Oregon DSL | |
| Represented By: | Nicole DeFever |
| Represented By: | Ms. Denise Gale Fjordbeck |
| 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.
