Warner v. Godfrey, et al.
| DANNY LEE WARNER |
| DEMETRIC GODFREY, JIM SALMONSEN, LYNN GUYER, CYNTHIA WOLKEN, JOHN DAUGHERTY, BILLIE REICH, KRISTY COBBAN, CONNIE WINNER, ROXANNE WIGERT, SAM SHORT, SCOTT MCNEIL, ROBERT HARMON, BONNIE SWANSON, MARK LOCHRIE, CHRISTINE KLANECKY, LYNN FOSTER, CATHLEEN CLARK, JAMES MILLIGAN, Sgt. COUGHLIN, Sgt. RENFROE, Sgt. WALLS, PAT MCTIGHE, Lt. OLIVE, Sgt. MARQUEZ, TRINITY SERVICES GROUP, INC., TERRIE STEFALO, DOES, John/Jane Does 1-15 and Mr. JOHNSON |
| 26-2637 |
| April 28, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Prison Condition |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 20, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 MOTION to Proceed In Forma Pauperis filed by Appellant Danny Lee Warner. [Entered: 08/20/2026 03:30 PM] |
Filing 11
ORDER FILED. The motion (Docket Entry No. 9) for clarification is granted. Appellant has filed a response to the courts April 29, 2026 order. Appellant has not filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Within 21 days, appellant must file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. Appellant is not required to submit a trust account statement. The clerk will serve Form 4 on appellant. [Entered: 08/03/2026 09:28 AM]
|
| Filing 10 REPLY to Response to Court Order (DE 8) filed by Appellee Demetric Godfrey, Appellee Jim Salmonsen, Appellee Lynn Guyer, Appellee Cynthia Wolken, Appellee John Daugherty, Appellee Billie Reich, Appellee Kristy Cobban, Appellee Connie Winner, Appellee Roxanne Wigert, Appellee Sam Short, Appellee Scott McNeil, Appellee Robert Harmon, Appellee Bonnie Swanson, Appellee Mark Lochrie, Appellee Christine Klanecky, Appellee Lynn Foster, Appellee Cathleen Clark, Appellee James Milligan, Appellee Coughlin, Appellee Renfroe, Appellee Walls, Appellee Terrie Stefalo. [Entered: 07/30/2026 04:34 PM] |
| Filing 9 MOTION to Clarify filed by Appellant Danny Lee Warner. [Entered: 07/21/2026 02:29 PM] |
| Filing 8 RESPONSE to Order - Order to Show Cause (OSC) (DE 3) filed by Appellant Danny Lee Warner. [Entered: 07/21/2026 02:25 PM] |
|
Filing 7
ORDER FILED. The motion (Docket Entry No. 4) for an extension of time to file the opening brief is unnecessary. Briefing is stayed pursuant the courts April 29, 2026 order. The court grants appellant extension of time to file a response to the courts April 29, 2026 order. The response to the courts April 29, 2026 order is due July 24, 2026. The clerk will send the April 29, 2026 order and attached forms to appellant along with this order. If appellant does not file a response, the court will dismiss this appeal. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. [Entered: 07/13/2026 03:06 PM]
|
| Filing 6 CLERK ACTION: Opening Brief submitted at DE 5 by Appellant Danny Lee Warner is filed. Original + 0 copies. [Entered: 07/09/2026 11:20 AM] |
| Filing 5 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellant Danny Lee Warner. [Entered: 07/09/2026 11:18 AM] |
| Filing 4 MOTION to Extend Time to File Brief filed by Appellant Danny Lee Warner. [Entered: 06/01/2026 02:24 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). If appellant files a statement that the appeal should go forward, appellees may file a response within 10 days after service of appellants statement. 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: 04/29/2026 03:28 PM]
|
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Appeal Answering Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellee) 7/7/2026, Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 6/8/2026. For appeal no. 26-2637, 6:22-cv-00008-DLC-JTJ. 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: 04/28/2026 02:29 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 6:22-cv-00008-DLC-JTJ 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 26-2637 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: 04/28/2026 02:23 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.
