United States of America v. Salazar
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| OMAR SALAZAR, Oso and Umar Ovalle |
| 25-6324 |
| October 8, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on March 4, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 7
ORDER FILED. Appellant has not responded to the courts order of October 10, 2025. This appeal is therefore dismissed. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. This order becomes the mandate of the court in 21 days. [Entered: 03/04/2026 02:10 PM]
|
|
Filing 6
ORDER FILED. Appellant has not responded to the courts October 10, 2025, order directing appellant to file a motion to voluntarily dismiss this appeal or file a statement explaining why it should not be dismissed as untimely. The court will give appellant one final opportunity. If appellant does not file a response to the courts October 10, 2025, order within 30 days of this order, the appeal will be dismissed. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. [Entered: 01/06/2026 02:33 PM]
|
| Filing 5 TEXT ONLY ORDER: On November 13, 2025, the court issued a global order resetting the non-jurisdictional filing deadlines for federally funded attorneys (including FPDs and CJA counsel), that had been stayed by the courts October 1, 2025 Supplemental Administrative Order. If your deadlines were suspended by the October 1 Administrative Order, please review the #Order Resetting Deadlines, available on the courts website, to find your new deadlines. [Entered: 11/18/2025 06:46 PM] |
|
Filing 4
ORDER FILED. The notice of appeal was not filed within 14 days after the district court entered judgment on November 15, 2024. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A). This appeal therefore appears to be late. Within 21 days, appellant pro se 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: 10/10/2025 11:51 AM]
|
| Filing 3 TERMINATED participation of Counsel for Appellant Carlos M. Santiago, representing Appellant Omar Salazar. [Entered: 10/10/2025 09:41 AM] |
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Sentence Imposed: 72 MONTHS. Appeal Transcript Order Due (Appellant) 10/20/2025, Appeal Transcript Due (Appellant) 11/19/2025, Appeal Opening Brief Due (Appellant) 12/29/2025, Appeal Answering Brief Due (Appellee) 1/28/2026. For appeal no. 25-6324, 2:19-cr-00203-RSM-11. 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 may result in automatic dismissal of the appeal. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1 [Entered: 10/08/2025 10:00 AM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 2:19-cr-00203-RSM-11 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 25-6324 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: 10/08/2025 09:56 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.
