Washington v. Bick, et al.
| RODERICK WASHINGTON |
| JOSEPH BICK, MD, individual/official capacity, H. MOSELEY, official capacity, J. MOECKLY, individual/official capacity, A. DELGADO, individual/official capacity, Warden LEANNA LUNDY, individual/official capacity, Case Record Analyst M. CRENSHAW, individual/official capacity, Case Record Analyst MARTINEZ, individual/official capacity, Program Administrator ERIC LAKE, individual/official capacity, Associate Warden D. CHAMBERLAIN, individual/official capacity, Associate Warden D. WILLIAMS, individual/official capacity, Associate Warden S. JOLLEY, individual/official capacity, Associate Warden J. ANDERSON, individual/official capacity, Captain WESTERGREN, individual/official capacity, Captain K. PRICE, individual/official capacity, JAMESON, Correctional Sergeant, individual/official capacity, M. CASTRO, Correctional Sergeant, individual/official capacity, BUILDERBACK, Correctional Sergeant, individual/official capacity, Correctional Officer R. ALANIS, individual/official capacity and FNP/MD CAROLINE CHEN-RODGERS, individual/official capacity |
| 26-2084 |
| April 6, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Prisoner-Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 28, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 4 Document received in this closed case after court order stating that no further filings will be entertained. Order and docket sheet sent to filer. [Entered: 04/28/2026 01:51 PM] |
Filing 3
ORDER FILED. Barry G. SILVERMAN, Mark J. BENNETT, Gabriel P. SANCHEZ This court has reviewed the March 5, 2026 and March 17, 2026 notices of appeal and the district court record pursuant to the pre-filing review order entered in appeal No. 98-80627. Because this court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal, it will not be permitted to proceed. See 28 U.S.C. 1291; Religious Tech. Ctr. v. Scott, 869 F.2d 1306 (9th Cir. 1989) (denial of temporary restraining order is appealable only if the denial is tantamount to the denial of a preliminary injunction). Appeal No. 26-2084 is therefore dismissed. This order, served on the district court for the Central District of California, constitutes the mandate of this court. No further filings will be entertained. DISMISSED. [Entered: 04/23/2026 04:58 PM]
|
| Filing 2 PREFILING REVIEW DOCKETING NOTICE. This case has been opened and assigned the Ninth Circuit case number 26-2084. This case is subject to a pre-filing review order entered in case number 98-80627, and will be reviewed by the Court to determine whether it will be permitted to proceed. [Entered: 04/06/2026 03:00 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 5:25-cv-01711-CBM-MAA 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 26-2084 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: 04/06/2026 02:55 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.
