Liou v. Stonecrest Financial, Inc., et al.
| BETHANY LIOU, an individual |
| STONECREST FINANCIAL, INC., a California corporation, SECURED INCOME FUND-II, LLC, a California limited liability company, JON O. FREEMAN, an individual, SHAFIQ TAYMUREE, an individual and PLM LENDER SERVICES, INC., a California entity |
| 25-6681 |
| October 22, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Foreclosure |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 15, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 5
ORDER FILED. Appellant has not filed a statement explaining why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, as ordered by this court on October 27, 2025. This appeal is therefore dismissed. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. This order becomes the mandate of the court in 21 days. [Entered: 12/15/2025 03:14 PM]
|
| Filing 4 MEDIATION ORDER (text only). Counsel may contact the Circuit Mediation Office at [email protected] to discuss services available through the Mediation Program or to request a settlement assessment conference. Information regarding the mediation program may be found at www.ca9.uscourts.gov/mediation. [Entered: 10/28/2025 04:15 PM] |
|
Filing 3
ORDER FILED. The notice of appeal was not filed within 30 days after the district courts September 17, 2025 order. See 28 U.S.C. 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A); see also United States v. Sadler, 480 F.3d 932, 937 (9th Cir. 2007) (requirement of timely notice of appeal is jurisdictional). Even if the notice of appeal were timely, the district courts order does not appear final or appealable. See Orange County v. Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corp. Ltd., 52 F.3d 821, 823, 825, 827 (9th Cir. 1995) (order expunging lis pendens is not a final decision for purposes of 28 U.S.C. 1291, does not satisfy the collateral order doctrine, and is not appealable under 28 U.S.C. 1292(a)(1)). This court may therefore lack jurisdiction over this 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, appellees may file a response within 10 days. Briefing is stayed. [Entered: 10/27/2025 01:38 PM]
|
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Mediation Questionnaire due (Appellant) 10/27/2025, Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 12/1/2025, Appeal Answering Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellee) 12/31/2025. For appeal no. 25-6681, 3:25-cv-06184-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: 10/22/2025 01:36 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 3:25-cv-06184-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 25-6681 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: 10/22/2025 01:34 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.
