United States of America v. Rodriguez
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| BENJAMIN RODRIGUEZ |
| 26-1517 |
| March 13, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 20, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER FILED. Appellant is not required to pay fees for this appeal because the district court found appellant to be indigent. The motion at Docket Entry No. 4 is therefore unnecessary. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). The opening brief has been filed. The answering brief remains due May 27, 2026. The optional pro se reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. [Entered: 04/20/2026 04:44 PM]
|
| Filing 9 Amended Notice of Appeal Received. [Entered: 04/15/2026 12:46 PM] |
| Filing 8 Attorney David Michael Herzog as Counsel for Appellee substituted for Attorney Caitlin Ann Baunsgard. [Entered: 04/15/2026 11:58 AM] |
| Filing 7 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by David Michael Herzog for Appellee United States of America replacing Caitlin Ann Baunsgard. [Entered: 04/15/2026 10:07 AM] |
| Filing 6 CLERK ACTION: Opening Brief submitted at DE 5 by Appellant Benjamin Rodriguez is filed. No paper copies are required. [Entered: 04/09/2026 01:36 PM] |
| Filing 5 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellant Benjamin Rodriguez. [Entered: 04/09/2026 01:35 PM] |
| Filing 4 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis filed by Appellant Benjamin Rodriguez. [Entered: 03/31/2026 10:52 AM] |
|
Filing 3
ORDER FILED. This courts docket reflects that appellant is proceeding without counsel. Accordingly, appellant is responsible for preparing a pro se brief stating, in appellants own words, why appellant believes the district courts decision was incorrect. The pro se opening brief is due April 27, 2026. The answering brief is due May 27, 2026. The optional pro se reply brief is due within 21 days after service of the answering brief. Appellant is not required to submit excerpts of record. If appellant does not submit excerpts, appellee must submit all documents cited in the pro se opening brief or otherwise required by the rules. See 9th Cir. R. 30-1. If appellant does not file a timely pro se opening brief, the appeal may be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. [Entered: 03/13/2026 04:57 PM]
|
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Sentence Imposed: N/A. Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 4/22/2026, Appeal Answering Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellee) 5/22/2026. For appeal no. 26-1517, 2:17-cr-00229-TOR-1. 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: 03/13/2026 10:47 AM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 2:17-cr-00229-TOR-1 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 26-1517 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: 03/13/2026 10:39 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.
| Search for this case: United States of America v. Rodriguez | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA | |
| Represented By: | Mr. Earl Allan Hicks |
| Represented By: | Ms. Caitlin Ann Baunsgard |
| Represented By: | Mr. David Michael Herzog |
| 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: BENJAMIN RODRIGUEZ | |
| Represented By: | Benjamin Rodriguez |
| 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.
