McElmeel v. Altemus, et al.
| SAMUEL PETER MCELMEEL |
| MATTHEW AARON ALTEMUS, AMBER ALTEMUS, COUNTY OF LANE, Oregon, DEREK BASTINELLI, L.C.S.O., STATE OF OREGON, PATRICIA W. PERLOW, Lane DA, DEBRA VOGT, Lane Judge, DEBRA VELURE, Lane Judge, ERIK THOMAS KNAPP, SPENCER GWARTNEY, Lane D.D.A, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNKNOWN PARTY, L.C.S.O. arresting and involved John Does, Deputy JOSHUA MARS, L.C.S.O., Judge MICHAEL SIMON, STEVEN THIEL, Lane Co. attorney, STEPHEN DINGLE, Lane Co. Attorney, LANE COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE and UNKNOWN PARTY, District of Oregon Court |
| 26-1729 |
| March 23, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Prisoner-Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on May 4, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis filed by Appellant Samuel Peter McElmeel. [Entered: 05/06/2026 02:49 PM] |
| Filing 6 RESPONSE to Order - Order to Show Cause (OSC) (DE 3) filed by Appellant Samuel Peter McElmeel. [Entered: 05/06/2026 02:30 PM] |
| Filing 5 Miscellaneous pro se filings received from Appellant Samuel Peter McElmeel. [Entered: 05/05/2026 12:06 PM] |
| Filing 4 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT pursuant to FRAP 26.1 and CR 26.1-1 filed by Appellant Samuel Peter McElmeel. [Entered: 05/04/2026 02:18 PM] |
Filing 3
ORDER FILED. The district court has certified that this appeal is not 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 and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis, 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, (2) a form statement that the appeal should go forward, and (3) a Form 4 financial affidavit. [Entered: 03/23/2026 04:20 PM]
|
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 5/4/2026. For appeal no. 26-1729, 6:25-cv-01349-SI. 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: 03/23/2026 12:07 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 6:25-cv-01349-SI 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 26-1729 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: 03/23/2026 12:04 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.
