Watkins, et al. v. California Department of Housing and Community Development, et al.
| MARYANN WATKINS and MICHAEL WATKINS |
| CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, MATTHEW WEISE, Supervisor of construction HCD, individual/official capacity, KEVIN HOOTMAN, Supervisor of construction HCD, individual/official capacity, SAL POIDOMANI, Plan Checker, individual/official capacity, GUSTAVO VELASQUEZ, Director of HCD, individual/official capacity, ZACHARY OLMSTEAD, individual/official capacity, RYAN SEELEY, General Counsel/Deputy Director of Legal Affairs, individual/official capacity, JOHN WESTFALL and ROES, 1 - 50 Inclusive |
| 26-970 |
| February 18, 2026 |
| U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit |
| Other Civil Rights |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on July 1, 2026. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 7 OPENING BRIEF submitted for filing by Appellant Maryann Watkins, Appellant Michael Watkins. [Entered: 07/02/2026 04:26 PM] |
| Filing 6 MOTION to Reinstate filed by Appellant Maryann Watkins, Appellant Michael Watkins. [Entered: 07/02/2026 02:16 PM] |
Filing 5
ORDER FILED. Lisa B. Fitzgerald, Appellate Commissioner. The district court judgment was entered on March 11, 2025. The district court denied appellants post-judgment motions on February 2, 2026. Appellant filed the notice of appeal on February 9, 2026. This appeal was dismissed on April 27, 2026 for failure to timely file the opening brief. The motion (Docket Entry No. 4) to reconsider the April 27, 2026 clerk order dismissing the appeal for failure to timely file the opening brief is denied. See 9th Cir. R. 27-7, 27-10(b)(1). The motion includes a request to reinstate the appeal, but does not include a proposed opening brief. The court will therefore take no action on the request to reinstate. See 9th Cir. Gen. Order 2.4. Any renewed motion to reinstate the appeal should be accompanied by a proposed opening brief. This case remains closed. [Entered: 06/10/2026 01:43 PM]
|
| Filing 4 MOTION to Reconsider Dispositive Order filed by Appellant Maryann Watkins, Appellant Michael Watkins. [Entered: 05/07/2026 05:19 PM] |
|
Filing 3
ORDER FILED. Appellants did not file the opening brief by the due date. This appeal is therefore dismissed. See 9th Cir. R. 42-1. This order becomes the mandate of the court in 21 days. [Entered: 04/27/2026 09:29 AM]
|
| Filing 2 SCHEDULE NOTICE. Appeal Answering Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellee) 4/29/2026, Appeal Opening Brief (No Transcript Due) (Appellant) 3/30/2026. For appeal no. 26-970, 2:22-cv-07286-FLA-RAO. 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: 02/18/2026 02:02 PM] |
| Filing 1 CASE OPENED. A copy of your notice of appeal / petition filed in 2:22-cv-07286-FLA-RAO 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 26-970 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: 02/18/2026 01:56 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.
