DAKER v. DAVIS et al

Filing 27

ORDER denying 26 Motion to Vacate. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE W LOUIS SANDS on 11/19/2021. (sbd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
VALDOSTA DIVISION
WASEEM DAKER,

:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
v.
:
:
E. LEE DAVIS, et al,
:
:
Defendants.
:
________________________________ :

CASE NO.: 7:19-CV-159 (WLS-TQL)

ORDER
Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate, (Doc. 26) filed on November 17, 2021,
this Court’s September 17, 2021, Order (Doc. 22) and Judgment. (Doc. 23.) This Court in its
September 17, 2021 Order (Doc. 22) denied as moot Plaintiff’s Motions to Expedite
Consideration of Objections (Docs. 20 & 21), denied Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration
(Doc. 18) and adopted the Honorable Judge Thomas Q. Langstaff’s Report and
Recommendation (Doc. 12.) The September 17, 2021 Judgment (Doc. 23) dismissed the
action.
The Court notes that Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal (Doc. 24) with the United States
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on November 16, 2021. Therefore, Plaintiff’s
motion to this Court was filed after he filed his notice of appeal. Accordingly, this Court lacks
jurisdiction to address Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate directed to this Court. (Doc. 26.) This
Court lacks jurisdiction to address Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate (Doc. 26) because the effect of
a notice of appeal is that a district court lacks jurisdiction, i.e., authority, to act after the filing
of a timely notice of appeal except for actions in aid of appellate jurisdiction or to rule on a

1

timely motion of the type specified in Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(4).
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate is DENIED without prejudice as this Court lacks
jurisdiction to grant relief at this time.

SO ORDERED, this _19th_ day of November 2021.
/s/ W. Louis Sands
W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2