Humphery v. City of San Diego, et al.
| CHRISTOPHER JULIAN HUMPHERY |
| CITY OF SAN DIEGO, JAJUAN HENDERSON, JOHN DOE, Officer Doe 1-4, LIAM COATS, Officer SD1729, TECHEAKBOTH UCH, Officer SD7280, KEVIN GARCIA ALVARADO, ERROL JOHNSON, CODY FENEIS, Officer SD1193, ANTOINE BLAKE, Officer SD1781, ROBERT NELSON, Officer SD7443, FREDDY NAJERA-ARREDONDO, Officer SD1052, JUSTIN MORRISON, Officer SD7144, CARLOS MAGALLANES, Officer SD7902, MANUEL NAVARRO-CASILLAS, Officer SD7911, Officer ROBERT GLADYSZ, SD1822, EDGARDO GUIZAR, Officer SD1926 and SAN DIEGO POLICE DEPARTMENT |
| 26-2713 |
| April 30, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 3, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 8
ORDER FILED. Paper Streamlined Request for Extension of Time to File Brief (DE 7) denied as unnecessary. It is unnecessary. The briefing schedule is stayed. Briefing shall be reset as necessary pending resolution of the motion for appointment of counsel (DE5). [Entered: 06/03/2026 03:48 PM]
|
| Filing 7 STREAMLINED request for extension of time to file brief for 30 days filed by Appellant Christopher Julian Humphery. [Entered: 06/03/2026 03:17 PM] |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of change of address filed by Appellant Christopher Julian Humphery. [Entered: 06/02/2026 03:01 PM] |
| Filing 5 MOTION for Appointment of Counsel filed by Appellant Christopher Julian Humphery. [Entered: 05/19/2026 01:23 PM] |
| Filing 4 MAIL RETURNED. DE 2 addressed to Appellant Christopher Julian Humphery. Action taken: none (no forwarding address found). [Entered: 05/13/2026 03:15 PM] |
| Filing 3 MEDIATION QUESTIONNAIRE filed by Appellant Christopher Julian Humphery. To submit pertinent confidential information directly to the Circuit Mediators, please email #[email protected] and include the case name and number in the subject line. Confidential submissions may include any information relevant to mediation of the case and settlement potential, including, but not limited to, settlement history, ongoing or potential settlement discussions, non-litigated party related issues, other pending actions, and timing considerations that may impact mediation efforts. [Entered: 05/12/2026 10:55 AM] |
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Appeal Answering Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellee) 7/9/2026, Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 6/9/2026. For appeal no. 26-2713, 3:25-cv-00813-DMS-KSC. 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: 04/30/2026 12:14 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 3:25-cv-00813-DMS-KSC 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 26-2713 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: 04/30/2026 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.
