Bruce v. Woodford, et al.

Filing 107

ORDER Granting Plaintiff's 102 Motion for Copy of Docket and Denying Defendants' 106 Request for Entry of Order and Judgment signed by Magistrate Judge Sandra M. Snyder on 08/09/2011. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

VINCENT C. BRUCE,

10
11
12

CASE NO. 1:07-cv-00269-AWI-SMS PC

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
FOR COPY OF DOCKET AND DENYING
DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF
ORDER AND JUDGMENT

v.
JEANNE WOODFORD, et al.,

(ECF Nos. 102, 106)
13

Defendants.
/

14
15

Plaintiff Vincent C. Bruce (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil

16

rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This action is proceeding against Defendants Ward,

17

Fulks, Fields, Schottgen, Tripp, Lloren, Frauenheim, Wan, Clark, Hense, and Adams. On August

18

2, 2010, findings and recommendations issued recommending that Defendants’ motion to dismiss

19

be granted. (ECF No. 77.) On September 8, 2010, findings and recommendations issued

20

recommending that Plaintiff’s request for preliminary injunctive relief be denied. (ECF No. 84.)

21

On September 21, 2010, findings and recommendations issued recommending that Defendant

22

Sanchez be dismissed for failure to effect service of process. (ECF No. 88.) On December 15,

23

2010, orders issued adopting the findings and recommendations denying injunctive relief and

24

dismissing Defendant Sanchez from the action. (ECF Nos. 93, 94.) On January 19, 2011, Plaintiff

25

filed a notice of appeal of the final judgment entered in this action. (ECF No. 97.) Plaintiff filed a

26

request for a copy of the docket and the order adopting the findings and recommendations dismissing

27

this action on February 22, 2011, and Defendants filed a request for entry of order and judgment on

28

August 8, 2011. (ECF Nos. 102, 106.)
1

1

Once Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal the district court was divested of jurisdiction and an

2

order adopting the findings and recommendations recommending dismissal of this action has not

3

been entered. National Ass’n of Home Builders v. Norton, 325 F.3d 1165, 1167 (9th Cir. 2003).

4

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

5

1.

Plaintiff’s motion for a copy of the docket is GRANTED and the Clerk of the Court
is directed to mail a copy of the docket to Plaintiff; and

6
2.

7

Defendants request for entry of order and judgment is DENIED pending the
resolution of Plaintiff’s appeal.

8
9
10

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11

Dated:
icido3

August 9, 2011

/s/ Sandra M. Snyder
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2