Articles

10-15-2017 – Governor Brown Signs Bill Allowing Guns Inside of Gun-Free School Zones

10-12-2017 – Is There a Right to Keep and Bear Arms? 9th Circuit to Decide in 2018

9-12-2017 – NRA Open Carry Lawsuit Opposes Open Carry

9-3-2017 – Supreme Court Long Conference on September 25, 2017

8-14-2017 – A Declaration That Open Carry Is the Right

7-28-2017 – Transcript Released in NRA’s Fake Open Carry Lawsuit

7-24-2017 – 50th Anniversary of California’s Loaded Open Carry Ban

7-12-2017 – Can we Save Our Right to Keep and Bear Arms?

6-27-2017 – Supreme Court Decides to Wait for Another Second Amendment Case

6/15/2017 – The Evil Practice of Carrying Weapons Secretly

6/6/2017 – NRA Lawyer says Odds are Supreme Court will NOT take Concealed Carry Case

6/2/2017 – The NRA Lost Another Second Amendment Appeal Today

5/29/2017 – Lead Plaintiff in Supreme Court Concealed Carry Appeal says Courts are Corrupt

5/23/2017 – Peruta Concealed Carry Lawsuit has Waited 2,768 Days – Supreme Court says Wait Longer

5/20/2017 – Second Amendment Case Peruta vs. California May Strike-Out at Supreme Court

5/03/2017 – Did the NRA Take a Dive in its Fake Open Carry Lawsuit?

5/01/2017 – Supreme Court Again Silent on Second Amendment

04/22/2017 – Supreme Court Math and Concealed Carry in Peruta v. California

04/14/2017 – Federal Judge Upholds Nonexistent Gun Ban

04/12/2017 – Concealed Carry, Incest, Gay Marriage and the Supreme Court

04/05/2017 – Justice Neil Gorsuch and the Second Amendment

3/29/2017 – The Next Second Amendment Handgun Carry Case to Go Down in Flames

3/28/2017 – Federal Judge Tells NRA to Put Up or Shut Up in Open Carry Lawsuit

3/22/2017 – Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor Finally Recognizes the Second Amendment

3/13/2017 – Another Second Amendment Appeal Shot-Down by the 9th Circuit

3/10/2017 – US Supreme Court to Decide Concealed Carry Petition in Two Weeks

3/5/2017 – The Florida Supreme Court Just Handed The US Supreme Court a Second Amendment Case It Can’t Refuse

2/23/2017 – California Asks Supreme Court to Wait For Nichols v. Brown Open Carry Appeal

2/15/2017 – NRA Got Spanked for Valentine’s Day!

2/3/2017 – President Trump’s Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch

1/24/2017 -A Concealed Carry Case SCOTUS Can’t Refuse

1/23/2017 -President Trump’s Judicial Opportunity and Conundrum

1/13/2017 -NRA Tells Supreme Court Open Carry is Perverse

1/11/2017 – NRA Drops Supreme Court Concealed Carry Appeal

12/30/2016 – NRA Asks US Supreme Court To Hear Two Concealed Carry Lawsuits

12/10/2016 – National Concealed Carry Snake Oil Law Will Fail

11/29/2016 – What Lies Ahead for the Second Amendment?

11/10/2016 – The Second Amendment and President Trump

10/03/2016 – A Federal 9th Circuit Judge Finally Finds a Right to Bear Arms in Public

9/28/2016 – Are You Protected by the Fourth Amendment if You Carry a Firearm?

9/20/2016 – Two Concealed Carry Cases Fire Blanks in U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

9/8/2016 – Another Second Amendment Appeal Crashing and Burning in 9th Circuit

8/24/2016 – Concealed Carry Snake Oil and Kool-Aid Peddlers Leave Town for DC

8/18/2016 – The NRA Files Legal Challenge To California Open Carry Bans – But Not Really

8/17/2016 – The Battle for the Second Amendment Moves to Hawaii

8/15/2016 – There is No Right to Concealed Carry – 9th Circuit Denies Full Court Petitions

8/5/2016 – Did California Lie to 11 Federal Judges in Second Amendment Lawsuits?

7/15/2016 – God Save The US From The Second Amendment Lawyers

7/8/2016 – NRA Segregation Now, Tomorrow, and Forever Position Must Fail

7/4/2016 – Try Recalling California’s Anti-Gun Politicians Before Starting Your Revolution

6/27/2016 – NRA Head Wayne LaPierre Really, Really Hates the Second Amendment

6/24/2016 – Judges Who Uphold Bans on Concealed Carry Are Not the Same as Judges Who Look the Other Way When Police Murder People in the Street

6/15/2016 – Where is the NRA’s California Open Carry Lawsuit?

6/13/2016 – What’s Next for the Right to Carry Firearms in Public?

6/8/2016 – Florida Supreme Court Justices Voice Contempt for the Second Amendment

6/5/2016 – Florida Supreme Court to Hear Second Amendment Carry Case with National Ramifications

5/17/2016 – The Second Amendment and the Concealed Carry Problem

5/11/2016 – Federal Court of Appeals Goes Berserk During Second Amendment Gun Case Hearing

5/10/2016 – California Supreme Court Shoots Itself In Foot Over Gun Case

4/25/2016 – Second Amendment Foundation Files Another Concealed Carry Lawsuit: May Backfire

4/13/2016 – Has the NRA Come to Bury the Second Amendment or to Defend It? –

4/6/2016 – Second Amendment Must Wait A Bit Longer In 9th Circuit

3/26/2016 – Concealed Carry of Concealable Firearm in a Vehicle Now a Crime of Moral Turpitude

3/21/2016 – Supreme Court decision wasn’t about stun guns – It was about the Second Amendment decision in District of Columbia v. Heller which is bad news for concealed carry

3/7/2016 – How to Stop Anti-Gun Bills in California from Becoming Law

3/3/2016 – The California Supreme Court Case Which Could Upend the Gun-Groups Concealed Carry Lawsuits

2/24/2016 – The Second Amendment – Checkmate in Four Moves?

2/10/2016 – Why California’s Waiting Period to Purchase a Firearm Will Be Upheld

2/3/2016 – Florida House of Representatives Passes Handgun Open Carry Bill

1/27/2016 – The NRA Thinks Not Getting Caught In A Lie Is The Same Thing As Telling The Truth

12/11/2015 – Why Were the San Bernardino Shooting Victims Unarmed?

11/20/2015 – Attorney Alan Gura May Have Fumbled Another Second Amendment Case

11/20/2015 – HELP WANTED: Competent Second Amendment Lawyer – Inquire Within

11/9/2015 – The Supreme Court may have Finally Found its Next Second Amendment Case

9/2/2015 – Full Derp Battle over Concealed Carry in District of Columbia

9/1/2015 – National Rifle Association Drops Lawsuit against San Francisco

8/31/2015 – The Future of the Second Amendment in California and Hawaii

8/25/2015 – Yes, America, the Second Amendment is a Universal Right!

8/14/2015 – Will this be the Supreme Court’s Next Second Amendment Case?

7/3/2015 – The Future of Open Carry in California Looks Bright

6/16/2015 – State of California Concedes Second Amendment Extends Outside the Home

6/8/2015 – The Second Amendment is Now in the Hands of these Eleven Judges

6/8/2015 – Supreme Court Won’t Hear Second Amendment Cases Until there is a Circuit Split

5/29/2015 – NRA Opposes Open Carry – NRA Now Takes Credit for New Texas Handgun Open Carry Law

5/26/2015 – Four Years Ago Today: Is Open Carry The Right Guaranteed By The Second Amendment

5/18/2015 – Why the Second Amendment Keeps Losing in Court

5/2/2015 – Black Panther Party Invades California Capitol – 48 Years Ago Today

5/1/2015 – The NRA Rearranges Deck Chairs on the Titanic

4/22/2015 – Chief Judge of 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Grants Motion of Lone Voice Defending the Second Amendment Open Carry Right

4/11/2015 – An Open Letter to the Orange County Register’s Editorial on Concealed Carry

4/03/2015 – Another Shoe Drops on the California Concealed Carry Lawsuits

2/27/2015 – Federal Judge Says No Second Amendment Right To Own Firearms

12/6/2014 – The First Shoe Drops On California Concealed Carry Lawsuits

11/30/2014 – Open Carry Gunfight At The California Corral: Start Of Year Four

11/30/2014 – California Open Carry Gunfight Begins Its Fourth Year

11/12/2014 – California Concealed Carry Permits – The Fat Lady Still Hasn’t Sung in Peruta v. San Diego

10/17/2014 – It may be Legal to Carry a Handgun in the Nation’s Capitol by Christmas

10/3/2014 – Another California Concealed Carry Lawsuit Loses before a Federal Judge

8/18/2014 – District of Columbia asks Court for More Time to Enact New Handgun Carry Ban

8/13/2014 – California Concealed Carry Case Peruta v. San Diego – Poised to Move or Stuck in the Mud?

7/30/2014 – Federal Judge Reluctantly Stays his Ruling in DC Handgun Ban

7/28/2014 – The DC Handgun Carry Decision – Throwing Victory into the Jaws of Defeat

7/26/2014 – Ban on Carrying Firearms in Public is Unconstitutional says DC Judge

7/21/2014 – The non-repeal of D.C., Gun-Control

7/2/2014 – US Supreme Court Still Silent On Second Amendment

6/28/2014 – Federal Judge Says Minorities Barred From Bringing Civil Rights Lawsuits

6/7/2014 – The NRA Supports Open Carry Except When The NRA Opposes Open Carry

6/2/2014 – NRA Lawyer Says California Concealed Carry Decision Likely To Be Overturned

6/1/2014 – NRA leadership Comes Out Of The Closet In Its Opposition To Open Carry

Please
donate $10, $25, $50 or $100 to the legal fund to restore your
right to openly carry a loaded firearm in California.

Click
here to donate to the legal fund

(Credit
or Debit cards – Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Discover or eCheck)


GoFundMe PayPal

Please donate $10, $25, $50 or $100 to the fight to restore your right to openly carry a loaded firearm in California.

Click here to donate.

Piryx

(Credit or Debit cards – Visa, Mastercard, Amex, Discover or eCheck)

BitCoins 1AdtAJfcdBkA777fwtVhmCwSwCKGTFrgGz Press@CaliforniaRightToCarry.org

Christopher Anderson et al v. John Scott et al - Concealed Carry - LOST

Share

Christopher Anderson et al v. John Scott et al

No Appeal Filed – This Case Is Dead

It had been 917 days from filing this lawsuit to a final decision by the district court!

The Stay was Lifted on November 17, 2016. The Defendants shall file, by December 2, 2016, a supplemental brief, not to exceed ten pages, addressing the effect of the Ninth Circuit’s en banc decision in Peruta.  

On December 2, 2016, each of the Defendants filed their supplemental briefs.

It had been 156 days since the previous request to lift the stay was filed!

It had been 3 days since the latest request to lift the stay was filed!

It had been 147 days since the Full Court petitions in Peruta and Prieto were denied!

On January 28, 2016 the district court judge assigned to this case assumed senior status.  There is the possibility that this case will be reassigned.

Update: On November 14, 2016 Birdt filed a “Request” for a ruling.  See November 14, 2016 update below.




I say “request” to lift the stay because the “motion” to lift the stay filed by attorney Birdt wasn’t a proper motion.  For one thing, Birdt was supposed to designate a hearing date for his “motion” on the cover sheet along with the name of the judge who will be hearing the motion and the courtroom where the hearing will take place.  There are other defects in his motion but you get the idea.

Had the motion been properly prepared and filed then the local rules of the court would have required that the district court judge issue his decision within 120 days (L.R. 83-9-1) and the attorneys for both sides are required to file a joint request for a decision with the district court judge and send a copy of the request to the Chief Judge for the district (L.R. 83-9-2).

After that:

L.R. 83-9.3 Duty of Court to Respond. Unless the Court makes its
decision within 30 days after the filing of a joint request, it shall,
within the same time period, advise the parties in writing of the date
by which the decision will be made. A copy of such written advice
shall be filed in the case and sent to the Chief Judge.

L.R. 83-9.4 Follow-Up Duty of Counsel. In the event the Court fails
timely to make its decision or to advise the parties of an intended
decision date, as required by L.R. 83-9.3, counsel shall then file a
joint request with the Chief Judge to establish an intended decision date.
A copy of such request shall be filed in the case.

And finally:

L.R. 83-9.5 Date of Intended Decision. Upon receipt of a request under L.R. 83-9.4, the Chief Judge shall, after consultation with the judge to whom the matter is assigned, establish a firm intended decision date by which the Court’s decision shall be made. Such setting of a final intended decision date shall be in writing, shall be filed in the case, and shall be served on the parties.

That said, I still do not understand why the district court judge assigned to this case hasn’t dismissed it with prejudice and closed the case.




Here is another concealed carry (CCW) lawsuit in which the eponymous attorney Jon Birdt is the attorney. This case is still in the district court.  The judge has ordered that the case be stayed pending the en banc decision in Peruta/Richards.  Birdt asked that the stay be lifted, his request was denied.

Birdt must have a half dozen or more concealed carry cases in both the district court and on appeal.  As far as I am aware, all of them have been stayed pending the en banc decision in Peruta/Richards.

I am tracking this case for entertainment purposes only.  Birdt’s lawsuits are always a train wreck.  Amusingly, the judge assigned to this case took senior status as of January 28, 2016.  One of his last official acts was to deny Birdt’s request to lift the stay.  The case will likely be reassigned to a new district court judge once a decision is reached in the en banc case of Peruta/Richards.

 




Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – February 9,  2017 – The deadline to file an appeal was yesterday.  None was filed.  This case is dead.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – January 10,  2017 – Well, 917 days after this case was filed and 147 days after the Full Court petitions in Peruta and Prieto were denied the district court judge in this concealed carry case came to the unremarkable conclusion that there is no right to carry a weapon concealed under the Second Amendment.  Summary judgment was entered in favor of the defendants and the case was dismissed yesterday.  As far as I am aware, this was the last concealed carry civil case pending in a district court in this circuit.  There will always be a criminal case popping up every now and then, I don’t generally track criminal cases.  The attorney, Jon Birdt, has 30 days within which to file his notice of appeal.

57 – Christopher Anderson et al v. John Scott et al – Concealed Carry

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
57
Filed & Entered:   01/09/2017
Docket Text Order on Motion for Ruling


Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 30,  2016 –
 
Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 16,  2016 – Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – December 2,  2016 – The Defendants filed their post-Peruta supplemental briefs as directed by the Court.  The two briefs are short (5 pages) and for all intents and purposes they are identical.  There wasn’t a whole lot the defendants needed to say other than the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals en banc decision in Peruta v. San Diego held that there is no concealed carry right under the Second Amendment for the Plaintiffs to assert.  As far as I know, this is the last concealed carry civil case that was still languishing in a 9th circuit district court.  I am sure that there are other concealed carry criminal cases but I don’t track them.

This case will be dismissed with prejudice…someday.  The judge took senior status at the beginning of the year which means he is effectively retired and doesn’t get paid to decide cases anymore.

DEFENDANT-JOHN-SCOTTS-SUPPLEMENTAL-POST-PERUTA-BRIEF.pdf

56-DEFENDANT-CHARLIE-BECKS-SUPPLEMENTAL-BRIEF-RE-EFFECT-OF-THE-NINTH-CIRCUITS-EN-BANC-DECISION-IN-PERUTA

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
55
Filed & Entered:   12/02/2016
Docket Text Brief (non-motion non-appeal)
56
Filed & Entered:   12/02/2016
Docket Text Brief (non-motion non-appeal)

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – November 17,  2016 – The stay is lifted.

Full docket text for document 54:
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Application to Lift Stay [49] is GRANTED. Defendants shall file, by December 2, 2016, a supplemental brief, not to exceed ten pages, addressing the effect of the Ninth Circuit’s en banc decision in Peruta (lc)

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
54
Filed: 11/16/2016
Entered: 11/17/2016
Docket Text Order on Motion to Lift Stay on Case

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – November 14,  2016 – Birdt filed another request for a ruling today.  On the court docket he entered it as a motion.  It isn’t a motion.  Given that in the Central District of California his request for a ruling must be submitted as a motion, I have no idea what the court will do with it.  Perhaps it will simply ignore it.  Regardless, there is no excuse for this case not to have been dismissed by now in light of the en banc decision in Peruta v. San Diego.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – October 31,  2016 – Nothing new since June 20, 2016 except for this change of address filed today.  Check back in a month for my next update on this case.

Full docket text for document 52:
NOTICE TO PARTIES by District Judge Dean D. Pregerson. Effective November 7, 2016, Judge Pregerson will be located at the 1st Street Courthouse, COURTROOM 9C on the 9th floor, located at 350 W. 1st Street, Los Angeles, California 90012. All Court appearances shall be made in Courtroom 9C of the 1st Street Courthouse, and all mandatory chambers copies shall be hand delivered to the judge’s mail box outside the Clerk’s Office on the 4th floor of the 1st Street Courthouse. The location for filing civil documents in paper format exempted from electronic filing and for viewing case files and other records services remains at the United States Courthouse, 312 North Spring Street, Room G-8, Los Angeles, California 90012. The location for filing criminal documents in paper format exempted from electronic filing remains at Edward R. Roybal Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, 255 East Temple Street, Room 178, Los Angeles, California 90012. THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (rrp) TEXT ONLY ENTRY

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – October 7,  2016 – Nothing new.  I’ll check the status again in about a month.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – September 30,  2016 – Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – September 15,  2016 – Nothing new.  It has been three months now since there was any activity in this case.  There is a motion pending to lift the stay.  If the district court judge does not rule on that motion within 120 days of it being filed (a month from now) then the lawyers from both sides of this case are required to file a document notifying the district court judge and subsequently the Chief Judge for this circuit of the district court judge’s failure.  The Chief Judge would, eventually, have to reassign this case to another judge if the district court judge did not comply.

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
51
Filed & Entered:   06/20/2016
Docket Text Supplement(Motion related)
50
Filed: 06/15/2016
Entered: 06/16/2016
Docket Text Notice of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Documents (G-112A)
49
Filed & Entered:   06/14/2016
Docket Text Motion to Lift Stay on Case

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 31,  2016 – Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 25,  2016 – Nothing new on the docket.  The mandate issued yesterday morning in Peruta v. San Diego.  As this case is stayed pending the resolution of Peruta v. San Diego, that stay is now over.  This order dismissing the case with prejudice is now just a formality.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 19,  2016 – Nothing new.  Given that the Full Court petitions in Peruta v. San Diego and Richards v. Prieto were denied today, it should not be that much longer before the stay is lifted in this case and the district court judge issues a decision ruling against the Plaintiffs.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 13,  2016 – Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – August 5,  2016 – Nothing new.  Given that it has been well over a month since attorney Birdt filed his brief and the court has not responded, I’m going to assume that the stay will remain in effect until the Full Court petition in Peruta v. San Diego is decided.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – July 1,  2016 – Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 30,  2016 – Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 28,  2016 – Nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 24,  2016 – The Pertua/Richards petitions to have their cases reheard before a full en banc court is going to delay issuance of the mandate which, in turn, is going to delay the dismissal of these concealed carry lawsuits.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 21,  2016 – Wow! Attorney Birdt thinks the en banc Peruta decision somehow entitles his clients to concealed carry permits!  51 – PLAINTIFFS POST PERUTA SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING WAIVER OF FURTHER BRIEFING AND ORAL ARGUMENT REQUEST FOR RULING ON PENDING MOTIONS TO LIFT STAY TO DISMISS AND FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

https://youtu.be/cYSsg_S8VU4

Full docket text for document 51:
SUPPLEMENT to EX PARTE APPLICATION to Lift Stay re Case [49], MOTION to Dismiss Case NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION BY DEFENDANT CHARLIE BECK TO: (1) DISMISS PLAINTIFFS’ COMPLAINT [FRCP 12(b)(6); (2) STAY PLAINTIFFS’ ACTION; (3) STRIKE PLAINTIFFS’ PREMATURE MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; MEMORANDUM[13], MOTION for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiffs Complaint [8] Post Peruta Supplemental Briefing; waiver of further argument and request for ruling on pending motions filed by Plaintiffs Christopher Anderson, Michael Dozier, Ari Friedman, David Marcinkus, Ari Miller. (Birdt, Jonathan)

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
51
Filed & Entered:   06/20/2016
Docket Text Supplement(Motion related)

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 16,  2016 – Gosh!  Attorney Birdt just got slapped with another notice of deficiency.

Full docket text for document 50:
NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: EX PARTE APPLICATION to Lift Stay re Case[49]. The following error(s) was found: Missing Proposed order which should have been submitted as separate attachment. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (lc)

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
50
Filed: 06/15/2016
Entered: 06/16/2016
Docket Text Notice of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Documents (G-112A)

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – June 14,  2016 – Well, instead of filing a motion to lift the stay in his case, Birdt files an improper ex parte application to lift the stay in which he refers to the Peruta decision as “infamous” and falsely claims that this lawsuit didn’t seek concealed carry permits.  He claims his is just a “carry” case.  Which is of course the same argument made in the Peruta/Richard’s cases.

Will the district court bitch slap Birdt and hard as they did the lawyers for Peruta and Richards.  Stay tuned.  49 – Birdt’s ex parte application to lift the stay in his case

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
49
Filed & Entered:   06/14/2016
Docket Text Motion to Lift Stay on Case

 

Full docket text for document 49:
EX PARTE APPLICATION to Lift Stay re Case filed by Plaintiffs Christopher Anderson, Michael Dozier, Ari Friedman, David Marcinkus, Ari Miller. (Birdt, Jonathan)

Full docket text for document 48:
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: denying [38] REQUEST to Lift Stay on Case. Plaintiff’s Request to Lift Stay is DENIED [38]. The Ninth Circuit has not yet issued its en banc decision in Peruta, let alone a mandate. (lom)

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 27,  2016 – There is nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – May 11,  2016 – There is nothing new.

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 29,  2016 – There won’t be a hearing regarding the motion to lift the stay.  The court will decide on the motion at a later date.

Full docket text for document 47:
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: COUNSEL ARE NOTIFIED that on the Court’s own motion, the Request to Lift Stay [38] set for hearing on April 25, 2016 at 10:00 a.m., is hereby taken off calendar, the hearing date vacated and will be decided without oral argument. (lc)

 

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – April 12,  2016 – The defense has been smacked with a notice of deficiency regarding one of its filings, Dkt #45.  This particular error is a minor one.  When the defense electronically filed its document with the ECF system, whomever it was that filed the document selected the wrong filing type from the list.

Full docket text for document 43:
OPPOSITION to REQUEST to Lift Stay re Case [38] filed by Defendant Charlie Beck. (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit Status of Pending En Banc Cases)(Chapman, Benjamin)

Full docket text for document 44:
REPLY in support of REQUEST to Lift Stay re Case [38]filed by Plaintiffs Christopher Anderson, Michael Dozier, Ari Friedman, David Marcinkus, Ari Miller. (Birdt, Jonathan)

Full docket text for document 45:
NOTICE of Joider and Support of the Opposition of Defendant Charlie Beck to Plaintiffs’ Request to Lift Stay and Issue Ruling on Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant John L. Scott. (Choi, Lana)

Full docket text for document 46:
NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Notice (Other)[45]. The following error(s) was found: Incorrect event selected. The correct event is: Joinder. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (lc)

 

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
46
Filed & Entered:   04/06/2016
Docket Text Notice of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Documents (G-112A)
45
Filed & Entered:   04/05/2016
Docket Text Notice (Other)
43
Filed & Entered:   04/04/2016
Docket Text Response in Opposition to Motion
44
Filed & Entered:   04/04/2016
Docket Text Reply (Motion related)

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – March 25,  2016 – The eponymous attorney Jon Birdt keeps making the same mistakes.  One would think he would learn from past mistakes but no.  There has been some activity since the district court stayed this case (see February 6, 2016 update).  Mr. Birdt filed a motion to lift the stay of his case (Dkt # 38).  If you are familiar with Mr. Birdt’s cases, it should come as no surprise that the court filed yet another notice of deficiency to one of his filings (Dkt #39).  This is Mr. Birdt’s second for this case and this case is just getting started.  One of the defense attorneys withdraw from the case, several others were added (Dkts 40-42).

Full docket text for document 42:
Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Benjamin F Chapman counsel for Defendant Charlie Beck. Adding Benjamin Chapman as counsel of record for Charlie Beck for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Defendant Charlie Beck. (Attorney Benjamin F Chapman added to party Charlie Beck(pty:dft))(Chapman, Benjamin)

Full docket text for document 41:
Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Alexandra B Zuiderweg counsel for Defendant John L. Scott. Adding Alexandra Zuiderweg as counsel of record for County of Los Angeles for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Defendant County of Los Angeles. (Attorney Alexandra B Zuiderweg added to party John L. Scott(pty:dft))(Zuiderweg, Alexandra)

Full docket text for document 40:
Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel: for attorney Lana Lee Choi counsel for Defendant John L. Scott. Adding Lana Choi as counsel of record for County of Los Angeles for the reason indicated in the G-123 Notice. Filed by Defendant County of Los Angeles. (Attorney Lana Lee Choi added to party John L. Scott(pty:dft))(Choi, Lana)

Full docket text for document 39:
NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: REQUEST to Lift Stay re Case [38]. The following error(s) was found: Missing Proposed order which should have been submitted as separate attachment. In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (lc)

Full docket text for document 38:
REQUEST to Lift Stay re Case filed by Plaintiff Christopher Anderson, Michael Dozier, Ari Friedman, David Marcinkus, Ari Miller. Request set for hearing on 4/25/2016 at 10:00 AM before Judge Dean D. Pregerson. (Birdt, Jonathan)

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
40
Filed & Entered:   03/24/2016
Docket Text Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel (G-123)
41
Filed & Entered:   03/24/2016
Docket Text Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel (G-123)
42
Filed & Entered:   03/24/2016
Docket Text Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel (G-123)
39
Filed & Entered:   03/22/2016
Docket Text Notice of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Documents (G-112A)
38
Filed & Entered:   03/21/2016
Docket Text Motion to Lift Stay on Case

Update by Charles Nichols, President of California Right To Carry – February 6,  2016 – This case is stayed pending an en banc decision in Peruta/Richards.

Full docket text for document 37:
MINUTE ORDER (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Dean D. Pregerson. COUNSEL ARE NOTIFIED the SCHEDULING CONFERENCE is hereby VACATED. (lom)

Full docket text for document 36:
NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Documents RE: Notice (Other), [33] pdf is a joinder to an opposition. The following error(s) was found: Incorrect event selected. The correct event is: Joinder(non-motion). In response to this notice the court may order (1) an amended or correct document to be filed (2) the document stricken or (3) take other action as the court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the court directs you to do so. (lc)

Full docket text for document 35:
MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS)by Judge Dean D. Pregerson: Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Application to Lift Stay [30] is DENIED. The mandate in Peruta has not yet issued. The court notes that the Ninth Circuit has maintained a stay in a similar case, Birdt v. Beck, No. 12-55115, for similar reasons. (Declaration of Elizabeth T. Fitzgerald, Ex. 1.) (lc)

Full docket text for document 24:
ORDER setting Scheduling Conference for 11/17/14 3:30 PM; compliance with FRCP 26(f) and filing of Rule 26(f) Report by Judge Dean D. Pregerson (lc)




 

2:14-cv-05241-DDP-PLA Christopher Anderson et al v. John Scott et al
Dean D. Pregerson, presiding
Paul L. Abrams, referral
Date filed: 07/07/2014
Date terminated: 01/09/2017
Date of last filing: 01/09/2017

History

 

Doc.
No.
Dates Description
57
Filed & Entered:   01/09/2017
Docket Text Order on Motion for Ruling
55
Filed & Entered:   12/02/2016
Docket Text Brief (non-motion non-appeal)
56
Filed & Entered:   12/02/2016
Docket Text Brief (non-motion non-appeal)
54
Filed: 11/16/2016
Entered: 11/17/2016
Docket Text Order on Motion to Lift Stay on Case
53
Filed & Entered:   11/14/2016
Terminated: 01/09/2017
Docket Text Motion for Ruling
52
Filed & Entered:   10/31/2016
Docket Text Generic Text Only Entry
51
Filed & Entered:   06/20/2016
Docket Text Supplement(Motion related)
50
Filed: 06/15/2016
Entered: 06/16/2016
Docket Text Notice of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Documents (G-112A)
49
Filed & Entered:   06/14/2016
Terminated: 11/16/2016
Docket Text Motion to Lift Stay on Case
48
Filed & Entered:   06/02/2016
Docket Text Order on Motion to Lift Stay on Case
47
Filed & Entered:   04/21/2016
Docket Text Order on Motion to Lift Stay on Case
46
Filed & Entered:   04/06/2016
Docket Text Notice of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Documents (G-112A)
45
Filed & Entered:   04/05/2016
Docket Text Notice (Other)
43
Filed & Entered:   04/04/2016
Docket Text Response in Opposition to Motion
44
Filed & Entered:   04/04/2016
Docket Text Reply (Motion related)
40
Filed & Entered:   03/24/2016
Docket Text Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel (G-123)
41
Filed & Entered:   03/24/2016
Docket Text Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel (G-123)
42
Filed & Entered:   03/24/2016
Docket Text Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel (G-123)
39
Filed & Entered:   03/22/2016
Docket Text Notice of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Documents (G-112A)
38
Filed & Entered:   03/21/2016
Terminated: 06/02/2016
Docket Text Motion to Lift Stay on Case
37
Filed: 01/30/2015
Entered: 02/02/2015
Docket Text Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive – no proceeding held
35
Filed & Entered:   11/20/2014
Docket Text Order on Ex Parte Application for Order
36
Filed & Entered:   11/20/2014
Docket Text Notice of Deficiency in Electronically Filed Documents (G-112A)
31
Filed & Entered:   11/19/2014
Docket Text Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Opposition
32
Filed & Entered:   11/19/2014
Docket Text Reply (Motion related)
33
Filed & Entered:   11/19/2014
Docket Text Notice (Other)
34
Filed & Entered:   11/19/2014
Docket Text Reply (Motion related)
30
Filed & Entered:   11/18/2014
Terminated: 11/20/2014
Docket Text Ex Parte Application for Order
29
Filed & Entered:   11/17/2014
Docket Text Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive – no proceeding held
28
Filed & Entered:   11/13/2014
Docket Text Order on Request to Lift Stay on Case
27
Filed & Entered:   11/12/2014
Terminated: 11/13/2014
Docket Text Request to Lift Stay on Case
26
Filed & Entered:   09/18/2014
Docket Text Order on Motion to Dismiss Case
25
Filed & Entered:   09/08/2014
Docket Text Reply (Motion related)
24
Filed: 09/04/2014
Entered: 09/05/2014
Docket Text Order
23
Filed & Entered:   09/03/2014
Docket Text Notice of Decision by other Court
22
Filed & Entered:   08/25/2014
Docket Text Notice of Decision by other Court
21
Filed & Entered:   08/20/2014
Docket Text Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive – no proceeding held
20
Filed & Entered:   08/19/2014
Docket Text Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive – no proceeding held
19
Filed & Entered:   08/13/2014
Docket Text Notice of Reassignment (CV-87) of Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program
18
Filed & Entered:   08/12/2014
Docket Text Order on Motion for Summary Judgment
16
Filed & Entered:   08/11/2014
Docket Text Reply (Motion related)
17
Filed & Entered:   08/11/2014
Docket Text MEMORANDUM in Opposition to Motion
15
Filed & Entered:   08/08/2014
Terminated: 09/18/2014
Docket Text Motion for Joinder
11
Filed & Entered:   08/01/2014
Docket Text Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties
12
Filed & Entered:   08/01/2014
Docket Text Answer to Complaint
13
Filed & Entered:   08/01/2014
Terminated: 01/09/2017
Docket Text Motion to Dismiss Case
14
Filed & Entered:   08/01/2014
Docket Text Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties
10
Filed & Entered:   07/28/2014
Docket Text Consent to Proceed (CV-11C) before US Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program Non-Final
9
Filed & Entered:   07/22/2014
Docket Text Notice of Appearance or Withdrawal of Counsel (G-123)
8
Filed & Entered:   07/17/2014
Terminated: 01/09/2017
Docket Text Motion for Summary Judgment
7
Filed & Entered:   07/12/2014
Docket Text Service of Summons and Complaint Returned Executed (21 days)
5
Filed & Entered:   07/08/2014
Docket Text Notice to Counsel (CV-20a) Magistrate Judge Direct Assignment Program – optional html form
6
Filed & Entered:   07/08/2014
Docket Text Summons Issued (Attorney Civil Case Opening)
1
Filed & Entered:   07/07/2014
Docket Text Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening)
2
Filed & Entered:   07/07/2014
Docket Text Civil Cover Sheet (CV-71)
3
Filed & Entered:   07/07/2014
Docket Text Summons Request
4
Filed & Entered:   07/07/2014
Docket Text Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties

 

Share