No. 22-6594

James Michael Fayed v. Oak Smith, Acting Warden

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2023-01-23
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: civil-procedure civil-rights due-process patent standing takings
Latest Conference: 2023-05-25
Question Presented (from Petition)

Question not identified.

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether the Petitioner's claims were properly exhausted and considered by the lower courts

Docket Entries

2023-05-30
Petition DENIED.
2023-05-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/25/2023.
2023-05-05
Reply of petitioner James Michael Fayed filed. (Distributed)
2023-04-20
Brief of respondent Oak Smith, Acting Warden in opposition filed.
2023-03-17
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including April 24, 2023.
2023-03-16
Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 24, 2023 to April 24, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-03-07
Letter from petitioner dated March 7, 2023 filed.
2023-02-15
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including March 24, 2023.
2023-02-14
Motion to extend the time to file a response from February 22, 2023 to March 24, 2023, submitted to The Clerk.
2023-01-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due February 22, 2023)

Attorneys

James Michael Fayed
James Michael Fayed — Petitioner
Oak Smith, Acting Warden
Idan IvriOffice of the California Attorney General, Respondent