Powelson v. Sausalito Police Department, et al.
| ROBBIE POWELSON |
| SAUSALITO POLICE DEPARTMENT, BRYCE MITCHELL, CITY OF SAUSALITO, MARTY PLISCH, BRIAN MATHERS, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, THOMAS GEORGES, NICK WHITE, SEAN SMGALSKI, DAVIN ROSE, STACIE GREGORY and JOHN ROHRBACHER |
| 25-6133 |
| September 30, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 25, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 22
ORDER FILED. Pursuant to the parties stipulation (Docket Entry No. 21), this appeal is dismissed with prejudice. See Fed. R. App. P. 42(b). This order serves as the mandate of the court. [Entered: 02/25/2026 01:32 PM]
|
| Filing 21 MOTION to Voluntarily Dismiss filed by Appellee Sausalito Police Department, Appellee City of Sausalito, Appellee Brian Mathers, Appellee Thomas Georges, Appellee Nick White, Appellee Sean Smgalski, Appellee Davin Rose, Appellee Stacie Gregory, Appellee John Rohrbacher. [Entered: 02/19/2026 09:31 PM] |
| Filing 20 TEXT ORDER FILED. The motion (Docket Entry No. 19) for an extension of time to file the answering brief is granted. The answering brief is due March 23, 2026.The optional reply brief is due 21 days after the answering brief is served. [Entered: 01/21/2026 04:49 PM] |
| Filing 19 MOTION to Extend Time to File Brief filed by Appellee Sausalito Police Department, Appellee City of Sausalito, Appellee Brian Mathers, Appellee Thomas Georges, Appellee Nick White, Appellee Sean Smgalski, Appellee Davin Rose, Appellee Stacie Gregory, Appellee John Rohrbacher. [Entered: 01/15/2026 05:17 PM] |
|
Filing 18
ORDER FILED. Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Brief (DE 17) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Answering Brief Due (Appellee) 2/6/2026. Optional Reply Brief due 21 days after service of Answering Brief. All briefs shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 31 and 9th Cir. R. 31-2.1. [Entered: 12/18/2025 04:35 PM]
|
| Filing 17 Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Brief filed by Appellee Sausalito Police Department, Appellee City of Sausalito, Appellee Brian Mathers, Appellee Thomas Georges, Appellee Nick White, Appellee Sean Smgalski, Appellee Davin Rose, Appellee Stacie Gregory, Appellee John Rohrbacher. [Entered: 12/18/2025 11:09 AM] |
| Filing 16 ADDED Counsel for Appellee Elizabeth Marie Sanguinetti [Entered: 12/17/2025 03:38 PM] |
| Filing 15 ADDED Counsel for Appellee John Christopher Deagon [Entered: 12/17/2025 03:37 PM] |
| Filing 14 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Elizabeth Marie Sanguinetti for Appellee Brian Mathers, Appellee City of Sausalito, Appellee Davin Rose, Appellee John Rohrbacher, Appellee Nick White, Appellee Sausalito Police Department, Appellee Sean Smgalski, Appellee Stacie Gregory, Appellee Thomas Georges. [Entered: 12/17/2025 03:32 PM] |
| Filing 13 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by John Christopher Deagon for Appellee Brian Mathers, Appellee City of Sausalito, Appellee Davin Rose, Appellee John Rohrbacher, Appellee Nick White, Appellee Sausalito Police Department, Appellee Sean Smgalski, Appellee Stacie Gregory, Appellee Thomas Georges. [Entered: 12/17/2025 03:32 PM] |
| Filing 12 CLERK ACTION: Opening Brief submitted at DE 8 and Excerpts of Record submitted at DE 9 by Appellant Robbie Powelson are filed. No paper copies are required. [Entered: 12/12/2025 02:03 PM] |
|
Filing 11
ORDER FILED. The motion (Docket Entry No. 10) to file the opening brief late is granted. The clerk will file the opening brief at Docket Entry No. 8. The answering brief is now due January 12, 2026. The optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief. [Entered: 12/12/2025 10:49 AM]
|
| Filing 10 MOTION to Accept Late Filing filed by Appellant Robbie Powelson. [Entered: 12/09/2025 09:44 AM] |
| Filing 9 EXCERPTS OF RECORD submitted for filing by Appellant Robbie Powelson. [Entered: 12/09/2025 09:32 AM] |
| Filing 8 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellant Robbie Powelson. [Entered: 12/09/2025 09:30 AM] |
|
Filing 7
ORDER FILED. Appellant was permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in the district court. That status continues in this court because it has not been revoked. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a). The motion (Docket Entry No. 3) to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is therefore unnecessary. The October 20, 2025 motion (Docket Entry No. 6) for an extension of time to order transcripts is granted. The October 6, 2025 motion (Docket Entry No. 4) for an extension of time to order transcripts is denied as moot. The opening brief is due December 8, 2025. The answering brief is due January 7, 2026. The optional reply brief is due 21 days after the answering brief is served. [Entered: 11/03/2025 11:53 AM]
|
| Filing 6 MOTION to Extend Time to File Transcript filed by Appellant Robbie Powelson. [Court entered filing to correct DE 5] [Entered: 10/20/2025 02:37 PM] |
| Filing 5 DEFECTIVE---MOTION to Extend Time to File Certified Administrative Record filed by Appellant Robbie Powelson. [Wrong filing type, corrected in DE 6] [Entered: 10/20/2025 02:25 PM] [Edited: 10/20/2025 02:38 PM] |
| Filing 4 MOTION to Extend Time to Order Transcripts filed by Appellant Robbie Powelson. [Entered: 10/07/2025 01:06 PM] |
| Filing 3 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis filed by Appellant Robbie Powelson. [Entered: 10/07/2025 11:32 AM] |
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Appeal Transcript Order Due (Appellant) 10/14/2025, Appeal Transcript Due (Appellant) 11/12/2025, Appeal Opening Brief Due (Appellant) 12/22/2025, Appeal Answering Brief Due (Appellee) 1/21/2026. For appeal no. 25-6133, 3:23-cv-01360-EMC. 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: 09/30/2025 11:41 AM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 3:23-cv-01360-EMC 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 25-6133 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: 09/30/2025 11:22 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.
