United States of America v. Shetty
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| NEVIN SHETTY |
| 26-1647 |
| March 19, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 29, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 10
ORDER FILED. Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Brief (DE 4) granted, Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Brief (DE 9) granted. Amended briefing schedule: Cross Appeal Third Brief Due Appellant (Nevin Shetty) 9/9/2026, Cross Appeal First Brief Due appellant (Nevin Shetty) 7/10/2026, Cross Appeal Second Brief Due Appellee (USA) 8/10/2026. Optional Cross Appeal Reply Brief due 21 days after service of Cross Appeal Third Brief. All briefs shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 31 and 9th Cir. R. 31-2.1. [26-1647, 26-2330] [Entered: 04/29/2026 08:41 AM]
|
| Filing 9 Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Brief filed by Appellant Nevin Shetty. [26-1647, 26-2330] [Entered: 04/29/2026 06:26 AM] |
| Filing 8 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT pursuant to FRAP 26.1 and CR 26.1-1 filed by Appellant United States of America. [26-2330, 26-1647] [Entered: 04/27/2026 02:56 PM] |
| Filing 7 SCHEDULE NOTICE. . Cross Appeal First Brief Due (Nevin Shetty) 6/10/2026, Cross Appeal Second Brief Due (USA) 7/10/2026, Cross Appeal Third Brief Due (Shetty) 8/10/2026 For appeal no. 26-1647, 2:23-cr-00084-TL-1. All briefs shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 31 and 9th Cir. R. 31-2.1. Failure of the petitioner to comply with this briefing schedule may result in automatic dismissal of the appeal. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1 [26-2330, 26-1647] [Entered: 04/15/2026 02:40 PM] |
| Filing 6 ADDED Counsel for Appellant Theodore Sampsell-Jones [Entered: 03/24/2026 12:03 PM] |
| Filing 5 Attorney Alexandra A.E. Shapiro as Counsel for Appellant substituted for Attorney Joseph Alex Little. [Entered: 03/24/2026 12:01 PM] |
| Filing 4 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Theodore Sampsell-Jones for Appellant Nevin Shetty. [Entered: 03/24/2026 09:28 AM] |
| Filing 3 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE by Alexandra A.E. Shapiro for Appellant Nevin Shetty replacing Joseph Alex Little. [Entered: 03/24/2026 09:20 AM] |
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Sentence Imposed: 24 Months. Appeal Opening Brief Due (Appellant) 6/10/2026, Appeal Transcript Order Due (Appellant) 4/1/2026, Appeal Answering Brief Due (Appellee) 7/10/2026, Appeal Transcript Due (Appellant) 5/1/2026. For appeal no. 26-1647, 2:23-cr-00084-TL-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: 03/19/2026 09:55 AM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 2:23-cr-00084-TL-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 26-1647 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: 03/19/2026 09:52 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.
