Brenes et al vs Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department et al
Filing
91
ORDER. The court ISSUES an indicative ruling pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62.1(a)(3) that 90 plaintiff's unopposed motion raises a substantial issue. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 5/19/17. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - MR)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
6
***
7
LYDIA VASQUEZ-BRENES, et al.,
8
Plaintiff(s),
9
10
11
Case No. 2:12-CV-1635 JCM (VCF)
ORDER
v.
LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE
DEPARTMENT, et al.,
Defendant(s).
12
13
Presently before the court is plaintiffs’ unopposed motion requesting that this court provide
14
15
16
17
written indication pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62.1 and Federal Rule of Appellate
Procedure 12.1(b) that the court is willing to entertain a motion for relief from judgment pursuant
to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a).
Plaintiffs seek clarification regarding this court’s treatment of their pendant state law
18
19
20
21
22
claims, arguing that the Ninth Circuit’s memorandum in this action did not discuss the state claims.
(ECF No. 90). Specifically, they wish the court would articulate if the pendant state law claims
were dismissed without prejudice in connection with a decision not to exercise supplemental
jurisdiction over those claims. (Id.).
Plaintiffs also seek clarification whether the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
would remain a party to this case due to a vicarious liability theory, though the specific claims
against that defendant have been resolved. (Id.).
...
...
...
1
Accordingly,
2
The court ISSUES an indicative ruling pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
3
4
62.1(a)(3) that plaintiff’s unopposed motion raises a substantial issue.
DATED May 19, 2017.
5
6
__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
-2-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?