Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00820/USCOURTS-caed-1_13-cv-00820-19/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

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ST. MICHAEL BALZARINI,

Plaintiff,

 v.

KYLE LEWIS, et al.,

 Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:13-cv-00820-LJO-BAM (PC)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION TO REOPEN TIME TO FILE AN 

APPEAL (ECF No. 60)

ORDER DIRECTING THE CLERK’S 

OFFICE TO SEND A COPY OF ORDER 

AND JUDGMENT TO PLAINTIFF

FOURTEEN-DAY DEADLINE

Plaintiff St. Michael Balzarini (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner, proceeded pro se in this civil 

rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Defendants Ulit and Agtarap for 

deliberate indifference to serious medical needs in violation of the Eight Amendment of the 

United States Constitution. On June 22, 2015, the Court granted Defendants’ motion for partial 

summary judgment, revoked Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status, and dismissed the action 

without prejudice. Judgment was entered pursuant to the Court’s order and the action was closed. 

(ECF Nos. 56, 57.)

On July 31, 2015, Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal, dated July 14, 2015. It states as 

follows:

Please send to me the proper forms to file notice of Appeal, because I wish 

to appeal the Order dated June 22,15. Request copy of ECF Nos.56, 57, 

not received a dopy to date. Would like to appeal this courts rulling on 

thses issues. This is my Notice of Appeal.

Again, Thank you for your prompt response.

Case 1:13-cv-00820-LJO-BAM Document 64 Filed 09/23/15 Page 1 of 3
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

(ECF No. 60 (all errors in original).) A notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days from the 

date of entry of judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). Here, Plaintiff filed his notice of appeal over 

thirty days from the June 22, 2015 entry of judgment in this action. His notice was therefore not 

timely.

However, based on Plaintiff’s allegation that he did not receive the final order or 

judgment in this action, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit construed his notice as a 

request to reopen the time to appeal pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6). 

(ECF No. 63 (citing United States v. Withers, 638 F.3d 1055, 1061 (9th Cir. 2011).) The Court 

of Appeals then remanded Plaintiff’s request to this Court to rule upon. (Id. at 2.) 

I. Motion to Reopen the Time to File an Appeal

Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6) governs a motion to reopen the time to file 

an appeal, and provides as follows:

(6) Reopening the Time to File an Appeal. The district court may reopen 

the time to file an appeal for a period of 14 days after the date when its 

order to reopen is entered, but only if all the following conditions are 

satisfied:

(A) the court finds that the moving party did not receive notice 

under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 77(d) of the entry of the 

judgment or order sought to be appealed within 21 days after entry;

(B) the motion is filed within 180 days after the judgment or order 

is entered or within 14 days after the moving party receives notice 

under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 77(d) of the entry, 

whichever is earlier; and

(C) the court finds that no party would be prejudiced.

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). In this case, regarding the first factor, Plaintiff represents that he has not 

received a copy of the Court’s June 22, 2015 order dismissing his action or the judgment 

Case 1:13-cv-00820-LJO-BAM Document 64 Filed 09/23/15 Page 2 of 3
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

27

28

pursuant to that order. (ECF No. 60.) His representation is unopposed by Defendants, and alleges 

a lack of receipt within 21 days after entry of that order and judgment in accordance with Rule 

77(d). The Court shall credit Plaintiff’s assertion. Secondly, Plaintiff’s notice, now construed as 

a motion, was filed July 31, 2015, well within the applicable 180 day limit for filing his motion 

under Rule 4(a)(6)(B). 

Finally, the Court finds no party would be prejudiced by granting Plaintiff’s request. “By 

‘prejudice’ the Committee means some adverse consequence other than the cost of having to 

oppose the appeal and encounter the risk of reversal, consequences that are present in every 

appeal. Prejudice might arise, for example, if the appellee had taken some action in reliance on 

the expiration of the normal time period for filing a notice of appeal.” Fed. R. App. P. 4 advisory 

committee’s note (1991 Amendments). No prejudice arises to Defendants in this case.

Consequently, Plaintiff has satisfied all of the conditions necessary to reopen the time to appeal.

II. Conclusion

For these reasons, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s request to reopen the time for filing a notice of appeal is GRANTED. 

Plaintiff must file his notice of appeal within 14 days of the date of the entry of 

this order; and

2. the Clerk’s Office is DIRECTED to send Plaintiff a copy of this Court’s order and 

judgment entered on June 22, 2015 (ECF Nos. 56, 57). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 23, 2015 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:13-cv-00820-LJO-BAM Document 64 Filed 09/23/15 Page 3 of 3