Synergy Project Management, Inc. v. City and County of San Francisco

Background

Synergy Project Management, Inc. filed an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order, an order requiring Defendants to explain themselves, and a preliminary injunction. Synergy sought an order requiring the City and County of San Francisco and Mayor London Breed to: (1) confirm that they had sought and obtained correspondence related to Synergy’s case from Mayor Breed’s personal computer and personal email account; (2) take immediate steps to preserve that correspondence; and (3) certify its preservation.

Jurisdictional Concern

The court stated that federal courts have limited jurisdiction and that a district court must continually examine whether it has authority to hear a case. The court said the basis for federal jurisdiction was not apparent because there were no active claims pending before it. On November 21, 2019, the court had dismissed all of Synergy’s federal claims with prejudice and remanded Synergy’s state-law claims to San Francisco County Superior Court. Synergy appealed the final judgment, and its state-law claims were pending in the state court.

Synergy identified Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 62(d) as its only basis for federal jurisdiction. That rule permits a court, while an appeal is pending from an order or judgment involving an injunction, to suspend, modify, restore, or grant an injunction under specified terms. The court concluded that Rule 62(d) did not apply because its final judgment did not involve an injunction. The court also noted that Synergy had cited Rule 62(c), but quoted language from Rule 62(d); the court attributed this to reliance on a case issued before a 2018 amendment reorganized the rule’s subdivisions.

Order

The court ordered Synergy to file a supplemental brief by April 11, 2021, identifying the basis for the court’s jurisdiction. Defendants were permitted, but not required, to file a response by April 15, 2021. The order did not grant or deny Synergy’s emergency motion for a temporary restraining order, order to show cause, or preliminary injunction. The court also noted that Synergy’s separate motion for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b)(6), or alternatively for an indicative ruling under Rule 62.1, was under submission.