Fletcher v. Gov. Entities ( 2024 )

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 Katherine Dee Fletcher, Case No.: 2:24-cv-00577-JAD-BNW 4 Plaintiff Order Denying Motion to Route Notice of 5 v. Appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court and Dismissing Unauthorized Direct Appeal 6 Gov. Entities, [ECF No. 33] 7 Defendant 8 This case was dismissed and closed based on Plaintiff Katherine Dee Fletcher’s motion 9 for voluntary dismissal.1 Fletcher filed a notice of appeal “to the USCA,”2 and the clerk of this 10 court forwarded that notice to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which opened an appeal for 11 her.3 In a second notice of appeal, Fletcher states that she “further appeals to the United States 12 Supreme Court,”4 and she moves this court to “route” her appeal to the High Court.5 13 Rule 18.1 of the Rules of the United States Supreme Court allows a notice of appeal to 14 the United States Supreme Court to be filed in, and processed by, the district court “[w]hen a 15 direct appeal from a decision of a United States district court is authorized by law.”6 The rule 16 also requires the appellant to “specify the statute or statutes under which the appeal is taken.”7 17 Fletcher does not specify the authority that permits her to skip the appellate court and 18 19 1 ECF Nos. 25, 26. 20 2 ECF No. 28 21 3 ECF No. 29. 4 ECF No. 32. 22 5 ECF No. 33. 23 6 S.C.R. 18.1. 7 Id. take her appeal of this court’s decision to grant her motion to voluntarily dismiss her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 case straight to the United States Supreme Court. Only a small handful of matters get 3}| that privilege—like challenges to injunctive-relief orders issued by three-judge panels*—and Fletcher hasn’t shown that her case qualifies. Just as a court may dismiss a cause of action when 5|| the claim is “so insubstantial, implausible, foreclosed by prior decisions of this Court, or 6|| otherwise completely devoid of merit as not to involve a federal controversy,”’ so too ought this 7\| court reject a notice of direct appeal to the United States Supreme Court when the law does not permit it. 9 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff’s notice of appeal to the United States 10||Supreme Court [ECF No. 32] is DISMISSED, and her motion to route the appeal to the High Court [ECF No. 33] is DENIED. 12 Dated: August 22, 2024 iin Sims — US. DistrictJadge Jennifer A. Dorsey 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 28 U.S.C. § 1253. Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env’t, 523 U.S. 83, 89 (1998).