Shade v. Bank of America, N.A., USA et al

Filing 79

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 2/23/10 DENYING 73 Motion for Reconsideration as moot. (Manzer, C)

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 vs. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., USA, et al., Defendants. / Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis. On December 23, 2009, the undersigned recommended that this action be dismissed with prejudice. On January 19, 2010, plaintiff filed a notice of interlocutory appeal. The appeal was processed on January 27, 2010. On February 10, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals (the "USCA") denied plaintiff's appeal for lack of jurisdiction based upon the fact that at the time the appeal was processed, the Honorable Lawrence K. Karlton had not yet ruled on the undersigned's December 23, 2009 findings and recommendations. On February 9, 2010, Judge Karlton adopted the undersigned's findings and recommendations and ordered the case dismissed with prejudice. On February 12, 2010, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal. On February 17, 2010, plaintiff's appeal was processed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. ///// ORDER ROSS SHADE, Plaintiff, No. 2:08-cv-1069 LKK JFM PS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

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
/014; shad1069.mot

On February 16, 2010, plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration in which he seeks reconsideration of the USCA's February 10, 2010 dismissal in light of Judge Karlton's order. However, because the USCA, and not the Eastern District of California, dismissed plaintiff's interlocutory appeal, this court has no authority to reconsider the USCA's order. Nonetheless, the undersigned notes plaintiff's appeal to the USCA was processed on February 17, 2010. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff's February 12, 2010 motion for reconsideration is denied as moot. DATED: February 23, 2010.