(PC) Murillo v. Holland

Opinion

JOAQUIN MURILLO, No. 1:15-cv-0266-DC-SCR Plaintiff, v. ORDER K. HOLLAND, et al., Defendants. Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed a motion for a bench trial and/or a settlement conference in this case along with a request for the appointment of counsel. ECF No. 163. Before the court could rule on plaintiff’s pending motion, defendants Holland and Gutierrez filed a notice of appeal of the court’s December 5, 2024 order denying them qualified immunity. ECF No. 164. Based on the pending appeal, defendants filed an opposition to plaintiff’s motion for a trial and/or settlement conference. ECF No. 167. The filing of defendants’ notice of appeal automatically divests the court of jurisdiction to proceed to trial on the issues subsumed within the appeal. See Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982) (stating that “[t]he filing of a notice of appeal is an event of jurisdictional significance—it confers jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the district court of its control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal.”). Therefore, the court lacks jurisdiction to grant plaintiff the requested relief. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff's motion for a bench trial and/or a settlement conference (ECF No. 163) is denied without prejudice to renewal following the resolution of the pending appeal. 2. Plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel (ECF No. 163) is denied without prejudice. DATED: May 21, 2025 md ° SEAN C. RIORDAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1]