Shoupe v. State of Montana, et al.
| JESSE WAYNE SHOUPE |
| STATE OF MONTANA, DAVE STORY, MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, MONTANA DEPARTMENT OF FISH, WILDLIFE AND PARKS, Deputy SPENCER, MELISSA MARIE BAKER, Mrs. EVANS, MONTANA CHILD SUPPORT SERVICES DIVISION, SHODAIR CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL, FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY and UNKNOWN PARTY, Title Company; Rosenberg law firm |
| 25-7346 |
| November 21, 2025 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on February 23, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 13 RESPONSE to Order - Order to Show Cause (OSC) (DE 11) filed by Appellant Jesse Wayne Shoupe. [Entered: 02/24/2026 11:13 AM] |
| Filing 12 MOTION for Miscellaneous Relief filed by Appellant Jesse Wayne Shoupe. [Entered: 02/10/2026 12:27 PM] |
Filing 11
ORDER FILED. Appellants response to this courts December 1, 2025 order attests that appellant delivered the notice of appeal to prison authorities for forwarding to the district court on November 14, 2025, within 30 days after the district court entered the post-judgment order on October 15, 2025. See 28 U.S.C. 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), (c)(1). The December 1, 2025 order is discharged. The district court has certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C. 1915(a). 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 the court dismisses the appeal as frivolous, this appeal may be counted as a strike under 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). 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: 01/29/2026 03:23 PM]
|
| Filing 10 1 additional copy of Opening Brief submitted at DE 6 by Appellant Jesse Wayne Shoupe received. [Entered: 01/21/2026 12:19 PM] |
| Filing 9 RESPONSE to Order - Call for Response to Filing (DE 8) filed by Appellant Jesse Wayne Shoupe. [Entered: 01/21/2026 11:18 AM] |
|
Filing 8
ORDER FILED. Appellant did not respond to the December 1, 2025 order. Within 21 days, appellant must file a response to the December 1, 2025 order. If appellant does not do so, the court will dismiss this appeal. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. Briefing is stayed. The clerk will serve the December 1, 2025 order and a Form 33 Inmate Declaration of Timely Filing on appellant. [Entered: 01/07/2026 03:11 PM]
|
| Filing 7 CLERK ACTION: Opening Brief submitted at DE 6 by Appellant Jesse Wayne Shoupe is filed. Original and 0 copies. (Briefing remains stayed) [Entered: 12/17/2025 11:54 AM] |
| Filing 6 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellant Jesse Wayne Shoupe. [Entered: 12/17/2025 11:52 AM] |
| Filing 5 MOTION for Appointment of Counsel filed by Appellant Jesse Wayne Shoupe. [Entered: 12/17/2025 07:47 AM] |
| Filing 4 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis filed by Appellant Jesse Wayne Shoupe. [Entered: 12/17/2025 07:45 AM] |
|
Filing 3
ORDER FILED. Appellants notice of appeal was dated November 14, 2025, and the district court received it on November 19, 2025, more than 30 days after the district court entered the post-judgment order on October 15, 2025. See 28 U.S.C 2107(a); Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). A pro se prisoners notice of appeal is deemed filed when deposited in the institutions internal mail system if appellant submits sufficient evidence. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 270 (1988). Within 21 days, appellant must file a declaration or notarized statement attesting to the date the notice of appeal was deposited and whether first-class postage was prepaid. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(c)(1); Douglas v. Noelle, 567 F.3d 1103 (9th Cir. 2009). If appellant does not do so, the court will dismiss this appeal. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. Briefing is stayed. The clerk will serve Form 33 Inmate Declaration of Timely Filing on appellant. [Entered: 12/01/2025 08:20 AM]
|
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 12/31/2025. For appeal no. 25-7346, 9:22-cv-00067-DLC. 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: 11/21/2025 01:55 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 9:22-cv-00067-DLC 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 25-7346 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: 11/21/2025 01:48 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.
