Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-00679/USCOURTS-azd-2_06-cv-00679-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Alberto Flores,

Plaintiff, 

v.

Phillip Verdugo, et al.,

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIV-06-0679-PHX-SMM 

ORDER

Before the Court is Defendants’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees (Dkt. 72). Defendants

filed its motion after the Court granted Defendants’ motion for summary judgment and

entered judgment in Defendants’ favor (Dkts. 69, 70). On September 5, 2008, Plaintiff filed

a Notice of Appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Dkt. 73). Plaintiff’s

appeal is currently pending.

Because the Court cannot resolve Defendant’s motion for attorneys fees while

Plaintiff’s appeal is pending, the Court will deny the motion with leave to refile after the

appeal is concluded. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees (Dkt. 72)

is DENIED with leave to renew the motion after resolution of the appeal.

///

///

///

///

Case 2:06-cv-00679-SMM Document 79 Filed 11/07/08 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 -

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant may reinstate its motion at the proper

time by filing a Notice of Renewal of Motion for Attorneys’ Fees; Defendant need not refile

the motion itself.

DATED this 6th day of November, 2008.

Case 2:06-cv-00679-SMM Document 79 Filed 11/07/08 Page 2 of 2