SAP America, Inc. v. Pi-Net International, Inc.

Filing 114

ORDER DENYING CONSIDERATION OF DEFENDANT'S FILINGS [111, 113] by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton.(pjhlc2S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/18/2019)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

SAP AMERICA, INC.,

8

Plaintiff,

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11

v.

Case No. 13-cv-01248-PJH
ORDER DENYING CONSIDERATION
OF DEFENDANT’S FILINGS

LAKSHMI ARUNACHALAM,

Re: Dkt. Nos. 111, 113

Defendant.

12
13

This court is in receipt of defendant counter-claimant Lakshmi Arunachalam’s

14

(“defendant”) “Motion for District Court Judge to Follow Suit with Six Supreme Court

15

Justices Who Took No Part in the Decision of Dr. Lakshmi Arunachalam’s Petition in S.

16

Ct. Case No. 19-1983,” Dkt. 111, and “Notice to Clerk of 28 U.S.C. § 2403 Constitutional

17

Question/Challenge in This Action Wherein the Constitutionality of Certain Acts of

18

Congress Affecting the Public Interest Is Drawn in Question,” Dkt. 113.

19

On April 2, 2019, the court granted summary judgment for plaintiff counter-

20

defendant SAP America, Inc., Dkt. 102, and subsequently entered judgment, Dkt. 103.

21

On April 17, 2019, defendant filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of

22

Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”). Dkt. 106. On May 1, 2019, the court

23

granted defendant’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis for purpose of her

24

appeal. Dkt. 110.

25

Defendant’s appeal remains pending before the Federal Circuit. SAP America,

26

Inc. v. Arunachalam, 19-1974. The filing of a notice of appeal divests a district court of

27

jurisdiction to consider aspects of the case involved in the appeal. Griggs v. Provident

28

Consumer Disc. Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982) (“The filing of a notice of appeal is an event

1

of jurisdictional significance—it confers jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests

2

the district court of its control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal.”).

3
4
5
6
7
8

The court will not consider the aforementioned or any future filings unless this
case is remanded by the Federal Circuit.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: December 18, 2019
/s/ Phyllis J. Hamilton
PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON
United States District Judge

9
10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2