P. v. Holy Names University

Opinion

1 2 3 6 7 M. P., et al., Case No. 21-cv-03014-JST

8 Plaintiffs, ORDER PROVIDING INDICATIVE 9 v. RULING ON MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF MINOR’S 10 HOLY NAMES UNIVERSITY, et al., COMPROMISE 11 Defendants. Re: ECF No. 100

12 13 Before the Court is Plaintiff J.P.’s motion for approval of minor’s compromise. ECF 14 No. 100. M.P., the guardian ad litem for minor J.P., filed this action in April 2021. ECF No. 1. 15 The Court granted Defendants Holy Names University and Denise Saddler’s motion for summary 16 judgment on April 6, 2023. ECF No. 72. 17 On April 20, 2023, J.P. filed a notice of appeal of the Court’s judgment. ECF No. 79. The 18 same day, Defendants filed a motion for attorney’s fees. ECF No. 80. On August 17, 2023, the 19 parties filed a stipulation indicating that they had reached a settlement and requesting that the 20 Court stay its decision on the motion for attorney’s fees, ECF No. 98, which the Court granted on 21 August 18, 2023, ECF No. 99. 22 J.P. filed the instant motion on September 21, 2023. ECF No. 100. Defendants do not 23 oppose the motion. The motion states that the parties have reached a settlement agreement that 24 “obligates Plaintiff to dismiss his appeal and not file additional claims in exchange for 25 Defendant[s’] releasing claim to fees and costs.” ECF No. 100 at 3. 26 As of the date of this order, the matter remains on appeal. See M.P. v. Holy Names 27 University, No. 23-15584 (9th Cir.); see also ECF No. 101 (Ninth Circuit order noting that the 1 consider the instant motion. Griggs v. Provident Consumer Disc. Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982) 2 || (“The filing of a notice of appeal is an event of jurisdictional significance—it confers jurisdiction 3 on the court of appeals and divests the district court of its control over those aspects of the case 4 || involved in the appeal.”). However, “[i]f a timely motion is made for relief that the court lacks 5 authority to grant because of an appeal that has been docketed and is pending, the court 6 || may... state either that it would grant the motion if the court of appeals remands for that purpose 7 or that the motion raises a substantial issue.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 62.1(a). Here, the Court finds that 8 the settlement serves the best interest of minor, J.P., and would therefore grant the motion if the 9 Ninth Circuit remanded the action for that purpose. 10 Pursuant to Rule 62.1(b), J.P. shall “promptly notify the [Ninth Circuit] clerk under 11 Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 12.1” of the Court’s indicative ruling. Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 62.1(b). The Court may only rule on J.P.’s motion if the Ninth Circuit “remands [the action] for 13 || that purpose.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 62.1(c). IT IS SO ORDERED. 3 15 Dated: October 23, 2023 . .

16 JON S. TIGAR 17 nited States District Judge 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28