Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00298/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-00298-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 240
Nature of Suit: Torts to Land
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSEPH MARION RIMAC,

Plaintiff,

v.

RANDY DUNCAN, RANDY CRAWFORD,

COUNTY OF DEL NORTE, and FORT DICK

FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT,

Defendants. ___________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. 07-0298 SC

ORDER VACATING

DEFENDANT COUNTY OF

DEL NORTE'S 

MOTION FOR SANCTIONS

I. INTRODUCTION

Before the Court is a motion for sanctions filed by Defendant

County of Del Norte ("County") against Plaintiff Joseph Marion

Rimac ("Rimac" or "Plaintiff"). See Docket No. 30. Plaintiff

submitted an opposition, and the County submitted a reply. See

Docket Nos. 35, 36.

The Court hereby VACATES Defendant's motion because the

District Court lacks jurisdiction over the matter while Plaintiff's

appeal is pending before the Circuit Court.

II. DISCUSSION

The County filed its motion for sanctions on May 24, 2007. 

Case 3:07-cv-00298-SC Document 37 Filed 07/11/07 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28 2

See Docket No. 30. Subsequently, on May 30, 2007, the Court

received notice that Plaintiff had appealed the Court's Order

Granting Defendants' motion to dismiss. See Docket No. 33. 

The Court cannot consider Defendant's motion for sanctions

because it lacks jurisdiction to do so until the appeal has been

resolved. This is because the filing of a notice of appeal divests

the district court of jurisdiction. See Scott v. Younger, 739 F.2d

1464, 1466 (9th Cir. 1984) (citing Long v. Bureau of Economic

Analysis, 646 F.2d 1310 (9th Cir.), judgment vacated on other

grounds, 454 U.S. 934 (1981). In other words, when a proper notice

of appeal has been timely filed, the general rule is that

jurisdiction over any matters involved in the appeal is immediately

transferred from the district court to the court of appeals. G &

M, Inc. v. Newbern, 488 F.2d 742, 746 (9th Cir. 1973). Thus, once

Plaintiff's notice of appeal was filed, this Court no longer had

jurisdiction over the case.

V. CONCLUSION

For the reasons discussed herein, the Court VACATES

Defendant's motion for sanctions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 11, 2007

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:07-cv-00298-SC Document 37 Filed 07/11/07 Page 2 of 2