CA - Elizabeth Holmes (Theranos) Wire Fraud Thread *Guilty* #3

[Seattle1]

The last entry #100 to the docket was August 27. Given the Oral Argument was June-- it could be 2025 before the Opinion is published.

[td]
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

[/td]​

Court of Appeals Docket #: 22-10312 [td] Docketed: 12/02/2022​

USA v. Elizabeth Holmes

Appeal From: U.S. District Court for Northern California, San Jose

Fee Status: Paid

​

[/td]

03/31/2024	91	Notice of Oral Argument on Tuesday, June 11, 2024 - 09:00 A.M. - Courtroom 1 - Scheduled Location: San Francisco CA. The hearing time is the local time zone at the scheduled hearing location. View the Oral Argument Calendar for your case here. NOTE: Although your case is currently scheduled for oral argument, the panel may decide to submit the case on the briefs instead. See Fed. R. App. P. 34. Absent further order of the court, if the court does determine that oral argument is required in this case, you are expected to appear in person at the Courthouse. If an in person appearance would pose a hardship, you must file a motion for permission to appear remotely by video, using the CM/ECF filing event "Motion for any relief (other than reconsideration or to seal)" and selecting the appropriate relief. Such a motion must be filed within 7 days of this notice, absent exigent circumstances. Everyone appearing in person must review and comply with our Protocols for In Person Hearings, available here. If the panel determines that it will hold oral argument in your case, the Clerk's Office will contact you directly at least two weeks before the set argument date to review any requirements for in person appearance or to make any necessary arrangements for a remote appearance that has been approved or directed by the panel. Please note however that if you do file a motion to appear remotely, the court strongly prefers video over telephone appearance. Therefore, if you wish to appear remotely by telephone you will need to justify that request in your motion and receive explicit permission to do so. Be sure to review the GUIDELINES for important information about your hearing, including when to be available (30 minutes before the hearing time) and when and how to submit additional citations (filing electronically as far in advance of the hearing as possible). If you are the specific attorney or self-represented party who will be arguing, use the ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF HEARING NOTICE filing type in CM/ECF no later than 28 days before Tuesday, June 11, 2024. No form or other attachment is required. If you will not be arguing, do not file an acknowledgment of hearing notice.[12873735]. [23-1040, 23-1167, 23-1166] (KS) [Entered: 03/31/2024 06:46 AM]
05/06/2024	92	Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice by Attorney Kelly Irene Volkar for Appellee USA. Hearing in San Francisco on 06/11/2024 at 9 a.m. (Courtroom: 1). Filer sharing argument time: No. Special accommodations: NO. Filer admission status: I certify that I am admitted to practice before this Court. Date of service: 05/06/2024. [12882491] [22-10312] (Volkar, Kelly) [Entered: 05/06/2024 08:15 AM]
05/08/2024	93	Filed (ECF) Appellant Elizabeth A. Holmes Motion for miscellaneous relief [Revise Oral Argument Schedule]. Date of service: 05/08/2024. [12883397] [22-10312] (Saharia, Amy) [Entered: 05/08/2024 06:40 PM]
05/09/2024	94	Filed (ECF) Appellant Elizabeth A. Holmes citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 05/09/2024. [12883563] [22-10312] (Saharia, Amy) [Entered: 05/09/2024 12:25 PM]
05/09/2024	95	Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: MCD): Appellants Elizabeth Holmes and Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani jointly request a modification to the oral argument schedule in their appeals of their convictions and sentences (respectively, No. 22-10312 and No. 10338) as well as in the consolidate appeal from the district court’s restitution order (Nos. 23-1040, 23-1166, 23-1167). Appellants’ joint motion is GRANTED. (SEE ORDER FOR FULL TEXT) [12883668] (AF) [Entered: 05/09/2024 04:23 PM]
05/10/2024	96	Filed (ECF) Acknowledgment of hearing notice by Attorney Ms. Amy Saharia for Appellant Elizabeth A. Holmes. Hearing in San Francisco on 06/11/2024 at 9:00am (Courtroom: Courtroom 1). Filer sharing argument time: No. (Argument minutes: 20) Special accommodations: NO. Filer admission status: I certify that I am admitted to practice before this Court. Date of service: 05/10/2024. [12883809] [22-10312] (Saharia, Amy) [Entered: 05/10/2024 10:25 AM]
05/15/2024	97	Filed (ECF) Appellee USA citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 05/15/2024. [12884825] [22-10312] (Volkar, Kelly) [Entered: 05/15/2024 11:33 AM]
06/11/2024	98	ARGUED AND SUBMITTED TO MARY M. SCHROEDER, JACQUELINE H. NGUYEN and RYAN D. NELSON. The audio and video recordings of this hearing are available on our website at Audio and Video. [12891127] (GJC) [Entered: 06/12/2024 08:28 AM]
08/23/2024	99	Filed (ECF) Appellee USA citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 08/23/2024. [12903862] [22-10312] (Volkar, Kelly) [Entered: 08/23/2024 04:20 PM]
08/27/2024	100	Filed (ECF) Appellant Elizabeth A. Holmes citation of supplemental authorities. Date of service: 08/27/2024. [12904367] [22-10312] (Saharia, Amy) [Entered: 08/27/2024 05:20 PM]

https://ecf.ca9.uscourts.gov/n/beam/servlet/TransportRoom?servlet=CaseSelectionTable.jsp&csnum1=22-10312

@WS Admin -- please see each [td] and [/td] format error which appears when the post is published but is not seen in draft.

This error occurs when posting from state or federal court dockets and seems to have started about the time of the last WS system update mid September. I've also tagged other posts where the left column of the docket is wacky after post published but looks fine in draft. Fortunately, the left column in this post is fine. Thanks for your courtesy @WS Admin

 

[WS Admin]

The source is including HTML. HTML is not allowed in posts for security reasons. We use BBCode.

 

[Seattle1]

The source is including HTML. HTML is not allowed in posts for security reasons. We use BBCode.

@WS Admin
Let me see if I got this right: So the "source" (i.e., federal and state official court sites) are suddenly including code (HTML) that WS deems insecure and this is why copying the case dockets as before from official government court sites no longer displays accurately on WS?

To be clear, I've been posting case/trial dockets as a courtesy to WS for better than ten years, and this display error including the HTML and misaligning the columns started occurring for the very first time around mid September -- coinciding with last system update.

Question: Did WS recently implement BBCode?

I Appreciate your courtesy reply @WS Admin that I not continue to waste time or financial resources to share dockets that won't be legible to members.

For example, tried to post a CT case docket today where the activity "Pre-Trial Hearing" displays as HTML [td] gibberish! What's worse, I don't see this until I hit "post reply" since it looks fine in draft mode! Thank you....

 

[WS Admin]

Even in the old vbulletin days HTML was not allowed. It was an option but highly discouraged.

If it worked before great, somehow it was able to create bbcode out of it. Here is a discussion from back in 2018 on the subject. XF 2.0 - HTML in posts

 

[WS Admin]

@Seattle1
After reviewing the post in question, I notice now that it is using BB Code and not HTML. I apologize for missing that originally.

I will do some research on this.

 

[WS Admin]

@Seattle1, Sorry it took so long to get a response but I finally have something to pass on to you. It turns out it is a problem with the editor and copy/paste. When I say editor I am referring to the box where posts are entered. This is a 3rd party software and not written by xenforo. That said, neither xenforo nor myself have any control over this.

Currently Xenforo is working on a large rewrite of the software. This expected new version (3.0.0) is planned for release early next year, it will include a new editor.

Dave