Perez v. State of California

Filing 21

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 07/17/17 ordering that plaintiff's objections 17 , construed as a motion for reconsideration, is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. (Plummer, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

IVAN VALDEZ PEREZ,

12
13
14
15

No. 2:17-cv-0221 KJN P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COURT OF
APPEAL,
Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a former juvenile detained in the California Youth Authority. Plaintiff

18

consented to proceed before the undersigned for all purposes. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). On July 6,

19

2017, plaintiff filed objections to the May 4, 2017 order dismissing plaintiff’s complaint without

20

prejudice. However, on June 27, 2017, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal. Because plaintiff filed

21

his objections after he filed his appeal, plaintiff’s motion, construed as a motion for

22

reconsideration under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, must be dismissed for

23

lack of jurisdiction. See Carriger v. Lewis, 971 F.2d 329, 332 (9th Cir. 1992) (en banc).

24

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s objections (ECF

25

No. 17), construed as a motion for reconsideration, is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

26

Dated: July 17, 2017

27
/pere0221.60b

28