Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06554/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06554-20/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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES L. THOMPSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

C/O MORALES, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:04-cv-06554-SMS PC

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR STAY

(Doc. 88)

Plaintiff James L. Thompson (“plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter is set for jury trial on

April 21, 2008. On February 25, 2008, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal of the court’s orders denying

his motion for the appointment of counsel, for discovery sanctions, and for summary judgment, and

a motion seeking to stay this action pending resolution of his appeal.

“When a Notice of Appeal is defective in that it refers to a non-appealable interlocutory

order, it does not transfer jurisdiction to the appellate court, and so the ordinary rule that the district

court cannot act until the mandate has issued on the appeal does not apply.” Nascimento v. Dummer,

508 F.3d 905, 908 (9th Cir. 2007). In this instance, plaintiff’s motion for the appointment of counsel

is not immediately appealable, Wilborn v. Escalderon, 789 F.2d 1328, 1330 (9th Cir. 1986), and

neither are the court’s discovery orders, see U.S. v. Fei Ye, 436 F.3d 1117, 1122 (9th Cir. 2006)

(discovery orders generally interlocutory and nonappealable), and order denying plaintiff’s motion

for summary judgment as untimely & procedurally deficient, see Winterrowd v. Nelson, 480 F.3d

///

Case 1:04-cv-06554-SMS Document 89 Filed 02/29/08 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

1181, 1183 (9th Cir. 2007) (only denial of summary judgment on qualified immunity immediately

appealable). 

Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for a stay of this action pending resolution of his appeal is

HEREBY DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 28, 2008 /s/ Sandra M. Snyder 

icido3 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06554-SMS Document 89 Filed 02/29/08 Page 2 of 2