Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01822/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01822-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

VINCENT F. RIVERA,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-06-1822 FCD DAD P

vs.

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, 

et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff is a Florida state prisoner proceeding with an action pursuant to 42

U.S.C. §§ 1981, 1983, 1985 and 1997. On September 21, 2006, the court denied plaintiff’s

motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis without prejudice and directed plaintiff to file a

new application requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis or the $350.00 filing fee. At that

same time the court granted plaintiff’s motion to amend his complaint. Thereafter, on November

30, 2006, the court granted plaintiff an additional thirty days in which to submit a new

application requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis as well as his amended complaint. 

Plaintiff has still not complied with this order.

Instead, on December 15, 2006, plaintiff filed a “Notice of Appeal/Application

For A Certificate Of Appealability [sic].” However, a review of the content of the plaintiff’s 

/////

Case 2:06-cv-01822-FCD-DAD Document 11 Filed 05/01/07 Page 1 of 3
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

2

confusing notice of appeal indicates that plaintiff does not appear to challenge the court’s order

granting him leave to file an amended complaint and an in forma pauperis application. 

An interlocutory appeal does not divest the District Court of jurisdiction to

proceed with other aspects of the case. See BNSF Railway Co. v. Ray, No. CV-05-0386-PHXDGC, 2006 WL 2792174, at *2 (D.Ariz. Sept. 28,2006); Grauberger v. St. Francis Hospital, 169

F.Supp. 2d 1172, 1175 (N.D.Cal. 2001). Therefore, this action shall proceed and the court will

provide plaintiff with a final opportunity to file his amended complaint and submit his in forma

pauperis application or the filing fee.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Within thirty days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall file an amended

complaint that complies with the requirements of the Civil Rights Act, the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice; plaintiff shall use the form complaint provided by the

court and answer each question; the amended complaint must bear the docket number assigned

this case and must be labeled “Amended Complaint”; plaintiff must file an original and two

copies of the amended complaint;

2. Within thirty days from the date of this order, plaintiff shall submit an

application requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis on the form provided by the Clerk of

Court, or the appropriate filing fee of $350.00;

3. Plaintiff’s failure to file an amended complaint and either an application

requesting leave to proceed in forma pauperis or the $350.00 filing fee in accordance with this

order will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed; and

/////

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:06-cv-01822-FCD-DAD Document 11 Filed 05/01/07 Page 2 of 3
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

3

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to provide plaintiff with the court’s form

complaint for a civil rights action and the application for requesting leave to proceed in forma

pauperis by a state prisoner. 

DATED: April 30, 2007.

DAD:4

rive1822.36lta

Case 2:06-cv-01822-FCD-DAD Document 11 Filed 05/01/07 Page 3 of 3