Pokorny et al v. Quixtar Inc et al

Filing 323

ORDER re 320 USCA Order, GRANTING motion to reopen time. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on January 8, 2014. (sclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/8/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

JEFF POKORNY, et al.,
10
Plaintiffs,
11
12

v.
QUIXTAR, INC., et al.,

13
Defendants.
14
15
16

) Case No. C 07-0201 SC
)
) ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO REOPEN
) TIME TO APPEAL
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

17
18
19

This order concerns non-party Dennis Obado's pending appeal of

20

the Court's July 3, 2013 order denying his request to retract his

21

choice to opt out of the class.

22

("Notice of Appeal").

23

See ECF Nos. 288 ("Order"), 306

The Ninth Circuit noted that Mr. Obado's October 11, 2013

24

notice of appeal was not filed within thirty days of the Court's

25

Order, though Mr. Obado contends that this was because he did not

26

receive the Order until October 8, 2013.

27

interpreted Mr. Obado's statements on this issue as a motion for

28

the district court to reopen time to appeal under Federal Rule of

The Ninth Circuit

1

Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6).

2

consideration of that motion to the Court.

3

The Ninth Circuit then remanded

Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(6) allows the Court

4

to reopen time to file an appeal for fourteen days after the entry

5

date of the order to reopen time, but only if the following

6

conditions are satisfied:

7
8
9

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

10
11

(A) the
receive
77(d) of
appealed

court finds that the moving party did not
notice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
the entry of the judgment or order sought to be
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

12
(C) the court finds that no party would be prejudiced.
13
14

The Court notes that Mr. Obado likely did not receive notice of the

15

Order because, as an opted-out class member, he is no longer

16

associated with this case.

17

Obado's statements are sufficient for the Court to reopen his time

18

to appeal.

Nevertheless, the Court finds that Mr.

His motion is GRANTED.

19
20

IT IS SO ORDERED.

21
22

Dated: January 8, 2014

23

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28

2