Has an appeal or notice of appeal been filed in Katie Johnson v. Donald J. Trump and what is the appellate docket number?

1. What the dockets actually record — termination and silence that matters

The docket summaries and party lists supplied focus on the original district‑court filings and the closing entries and explicitly record the case termination on May 2, 2016, without subsequent appellate activity. The consolidated extracts include the initial complaint, administrative entries, and later notations about returned mail, but they do not include a notice of appeal filing, an appellate docket number, or any mandate or transmission to a U.S. Court of Appeals. Where a civil party files an appeal, federal dockets typically show a filed notice of appeal and cross‑references to the appellate court docket; those customary entries are absent from these records, which repeatedly emphasize the absence of appellate entries ^{[1] [2]}.

2. Cross‑source consistency — multiple copies saying the same thing

Three independent renditions of the docket material and party listings reproduce the same substance: termination on May 2, 2016, and no recorded appellate filing. The first source set outlines the case number and the termination but has no appeal notation; two other extracts mirror that absence and even flag administrative follow‑up items (returned mail) as the only post‑termination activity. The uniformity across these materials strengthens the conclusion that, within the universe of the provided records, there is no traceable appeal or appellate docket number for this matter ^{[3] [2]}.

3. What’s missing and why that gap matters for verification

The supplied analyses include a PDF rendering script and disparate document captures that do not contain appellate indexes or notices. Because an appeal would generate a distinct docket entry and likely an appellate docket identifier, the lack of such entries is material — it means one cannot point to an appellate docket number based on these records alone. The materials do not include a scanned notice of appeal, a Clerk’s transmission entry to a circuit court, or any appellate case number cross‑reference; that absence is consistent across the different extracts and document types in the packet, underscoring that the available record is incomplete for anyone seeking an appellate number ^{[4] [2]}.

4. Possible explanations consistent with these records

Several benign and procedural explanations fit the evidence: the plaintiff may have chosen not to appeal, an appeal might never have been filed, or an appeal could have been filed but not reflected in the captured snapshots. However, none of the provided materials contains even a procedural hint of an appeal, such as a filed notice or a docket transmission. Because the records include standard administrative notations yet show no appellate filings, the most straightforward interpretation consistent with all supplied documents is that no appeal was filed or recorded within these captured sources ^[1].

5. Bottom line and recommended next steps given the record you supplied

Based solely on the provided docket extracts and document summaries, the answer is clear: no appeal or appellate docket number is shown for Katie Johnson v. Donald J. Trump, 5:16‑cv‑00797, in these materials. The packet repeatedly records case termination on May 2, 2016, and lacks any notice‑of‑appeal entry; therefore no appellate docket number can be identified from these sources ^{[1] [2]}. If you require absolute confirmation beyond these documents, consult the official federal appellate dockets or the district court clerk’s office for a certified search; the current materials do not supply an appellate identifier.