Case ID: f-appx_342/html/0254-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bruce DARIAN, Individually, on his own behalf, aka SEAL 1 dba Darian Construction, Co., Plaintiff-Appellant, and USA, ex rel. Darian, as a Relator on behalf of the United States Government, Plaintiff, v. ACCENT BUILDERS, INC., a California corporation, aka SEAL A; et al., Defendants, American International Companies; et al., Defendants, and David Pasternak; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
    No. 06-55692.
    United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    Submitted June 3, 2009 .
    Filed June 16, 2009.
    Bruce Darían, Hollywood, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
    
      Frank W. Molloy, Esquire, Hunter Mol-loy Salcido, LLP, Pasadena, CA, Michael K. Walton, Esquire, Cosgrave Vergeer Kester LLP, Portland, OR, Paul H. Levine, Esquire, Henry N. Jannol Law Offices, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants.
    John W. Patton, Jr., Esquire, Pasternak, Pasternak & Patton, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.
    Before: RYMER and GRABER, Circuit Judges, and ALDRICH, District Judge.
    
      
       The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).
    
    
      
       The Honorable Ann Aldrich, Senior United States District Judge for the Northern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.
    
   MEMORANDUM

Bruce Darían appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) in favor of state court-appointed receiver David Pasternak and his law firm. We lack jurisdiction and therefore must dismiss the appeal.

For purposes of determining the timeliness of a Notice of Appeal, the United States is only considered a party in a qui tam action under the False Claims Act if it formally intervenes. See United States ex rel. Eisenstein v. City of New York, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 2230, 2233-35, 173 L.Ed.2d 1255 (2009). Because the United States never intervened, Darían had only thirty days, not sixty, to file his Notice of Appeal. See Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). He failed to do so and therefore we lack jurisdiction.

DISMISSED.

ORDER

The memorandum disposition filed on June 5, 2009, is withdrawn in light of United States ex rel. Eisenstein v. City of New York, — U.S. -, 129 S.Ct. 2230, 173 L.Ed.2d 1255 (2009). The attached memorandum disposition is filed in its stead. 
      
       This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.