Koopmann v. US
EUGENE R. BISCAILUZ, JAMES H. BIESTEK, ROBERT L. BEAVIS, RONALD L. BLASH, PAUL L. BAILEY, LAWRENCE C. BECKER, WILLIAM C. BRASHEAR, WILLIAM C. BARHAM, JON R. BOSTON, GEORGE A. BLEYLE, STANLEY M. ANDERSON, ROBERT M. BENZIES, CHARLES M. ADAMS, LOUIS C. ATKINS, WAYNE E. ALLEN, WILLIAM KOOPMANN, JOSEPH E. ARMSTEAD, DONALD A. BLANCHARD, JAMES R. ALLEN and WILLIAM BRASHEAR |
UNITED STATES |
WILLIAM ROYALL, JR. |
21-1746 |
March 17, 2021 |
U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit |
Other |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on April 27, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 5 ORDER granting motion to extend time to file brief [ # 4 ] filed by Appellant William Royall, Jr. The opening brief is due 06/11/2021. Service as of this date by the Clerk of Court. [771341] [LMS] [Entered: 04/27/2021 09:08 AM] |
Filing 4 MODIFIED ENTRY: MOTION of Appellant William Royall, Jr. to extend the time to 06/11/2021 to file brief. Service: 04/19/2021 by clerk. [769681]--[Edited 04/23/2021 by MMA] [JCP] [Entered: 04/19/2021 05:07 PM] |
Filing 3 MODIFIED ENTRY: Notice of Unrepresented Person Appearance for Appellant William Royall, Jr. Service: 03/31/2021 by clerk. [766037]--[Edited 04/01/2021 by MMA] [JCP] [Entered: 03/31/2021 05:10 PM] |
Filing 2 Entry of appearance for Janet A. Bradley as counsel for Appellee US. Service: 03/22/2021 by email, US mail. [763695] [21-1746] [Janet Bradley] [Entered: 03/22/2021 09:46 AM] |
Filing 1 Appeal docketed. Received: 03/09/2021. [762985] Entry of Appearance due 03/31/2021. Appellant/Petitioner's Informal brief is due 04/12/2021. [MMA] [Entered: 03/17/2021 02:03 PM] |
Access additional case information on PACER
Access the Case Summary and Docket Report to access additional information about this case on the US 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.