Herrera v. Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd. ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 WINIFREDO HERRERA, et al., 7 Case No. 20-cv-03019-JCS Plaintiffs, 8 Vv. ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR 9 LEAVE TO FILE MOTION FOR CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS LTD., RECONSIDERATION WITHOUT 10 PREJUDICE Defendant. 11 Re: Dkt. No. 67 qg 12 13 On June 11, 2021, Defendant Cathay Pacific filed a Motion for Leave to File a Motion for v 14 || Reconsideration (“Motion”) of the Court’s May 28, 2021 Order denying its Motion to Dismiss or © 15 || in the Alternative, Compel Arbitration. Subsequently, it filed a Notice of Appeal of that Order to Q 16 || the Ninth Circuit. See dkt. no. 68. Because both the Motion and the appeal challenge the same = 17 || decision, the Court concludes that it is divested of jurisdiction as to the Motion. See City of Los 18 || Angeles, Harbor Div. vy. Santa Monica Baykeeper, 254 F.3d 882, 886 (9th Cir. 2001) (“[T]he filing 19 || of a notice of interlocutory appeal divests the district court of jurisdiction over the particular issues 20 || involved in that appeal.”). Accordingly, the Motion is DENIED without prejudice. 21 IT IS SO ORDERED. 22 23 Dated: June 28, 2021 24 J PH C. SPERO 25 ief Magistrate Judge 26 27 28