Bassford v. Mesa, City of

Opinion

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Gabriel Bassford, No. CV-22-00572-PHX-JAT

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 Kyler Newby,

13 Defendant. 14 15 On August 15, 2024, this Court denied, in part, Defendant Newby’s motion for 16 summary judgment. On September 9, 2024, Defendant Newby filed a notice of 17 interlocutory appeal of the Court’s August 15, 2024 Order regarding the Court’s denial of 18 qualified immunity. 19 Defendant Newby has now filed a motion to stay this case. Generally, the filing of 20 a notice of interlocutory appeal of a denial of qualified immunity “divests the district court 21 of jurisdiction to proceed with trial” on the claim being appealed. Chuman v. Wright, 960 22 F.2d 104, 105 (9th Cir. 1992). Therefore, the Court will grant the motion to stay. 23 If at any point prior to the conclusion of the appeal, Plaintiff moves to lift the stay, 24 Plaintiff must show that the appeal is either frivolous or has been waived. Id. An 25 interlocutory appeal of the denial of qualified immunity “is frivolous ‘if the results are 26 obvious or the arguments of error are wholly without merit.’” Vasquez-Brenes v. Las Vegas 27 Metro. Police Dep’t, No. 2:12-CV-1635 JCM VCF, 2015 WL 1268026, at *1 (D. Nev. 28 Mar. 19, 2015) (quoting Amwest Mortg. Corp. v. Grady, 925 F.2d 1162, 1165 (9th Cir. 1991)). “Stated differently, an appeal from an order denying qualified immunity on || summary judgment is frivolous where the order is so plainly correct that nothing can be || said on the other side.” Wilson vy. Maricopa Cnty., 484 F. Supp. 2d 1015, 1021 (D. Ariz. 2006). 5 Therefore, 6 IT IS ORDERED that the motion to stay (Doc. 118) is granted. The deadlines are vacated. 8 Dated this 10th day of September, 2024. 9 10 i 11 James A. Teilborg 12 Senior United States District Judge 13 14 1S cc: Judge Morrissey 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

_2-