Abrahams et al

Filing 65

ORDER Denying 62 Appellant's motion to amend the judgement and vacate thedismissal. Signed by Judge Gonzalo P. Curiel on 10/31/2013. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service)(srm)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CHARLES L. ABRAHAMS,
Debtor/Appellant

12
13

Case No. 12cv1560-GPC-BGS
BAP No. SC-12-1319

vs.

Bankruptcy No. 10-00968
ORDER DENYING
APPELLANT’S MOTION TO
AMEND THE JUDGMENT
AND VACATE DISMISSAL

14
15

MATHIAS HENTZ,

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

[ECF No. 62]

Creditor/Appellee.

Before the Court is Appellant Charles L. Abrahams’ (“Appellant” or
“Abrahams”) motion to amend the judgment. (Dkt. No. 62.) Pursuant to L.Civ.R.
7.1.d.1, the Court finds the matter suitable for adjudication without oral argument. For
the reasons set forth below, the Court hereby DENIES Appellant’s motion as moot.
DISCUSSION
On June 18, 2013, this Court issued an Order granting Trustee Leslie
Gladstone’s motion to dismiss Abraham’s bankruptcy appeal. (Dkt. No. 54,
“Judicial Order.”) On July 19, 2013, Abrahams appealed the Judicial Order and
filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
(Dkt. No. 56.) Thereafter, the Ninth Circuit issued a case number and schedule
order as to Abraham’s appeal. (Dkt. Nos. 59, 60.)
-1-

12cv1560-GPC-BGS

1

In opposition to Appellant’s motion, Trustee Gladstone argues this Court

2

lacks jurisdiction to grant Appellant’s motion as the notice of appeal has been filed

3

and any relief would change the nature of the issue on appeal. (Dkt. No. 63 at 4-5.)

4

The Court concurs with Trustee. See Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount

5

Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982) ( “The filing of a notice of appeal ... confers jurisdiction

6

on the court of appeals and divests the district court of its control over those aspects

7

of the case involved in the appeal”). As the Court has been divested of its’

8

jurisdiction pending Abraham’s appeal to the Ninth Circuit, the Court hereby

9

DENIES AS MOOT Appellant’s motion to amend the judgement and vacate the

10
11

dismissal. (Dkt. No. 62.)
IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13

DATED: October 31, 2013

14
15

HON. GONZALO P. CURIEL
United States District Judge

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-

12cv1560-GPC-BGS