Herrera v. Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd.
- Joseph Spero
- 3:20-cv-03019
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Herrera v. Cathay Pacific, Judge Spero denied Cathay’s request to seek reconsideration without prejudice because its appeal removed jurisdiction from the district court.
Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd., which filed the motion and the appeal; the plaintiffs, who were the opposing parties in the case.
What happened
In Herrera v. Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd., Cathay Pacific asked for permission to file a motion asking the court to reconsider its earlier refusal to dismiss the case or require arbitration. Cathay later appealed that earlier decision to the Ninth Circuit.
The court said the motion and the appeal challenged the same decision. Under Ninth Circuit law, filing an interlocutory appeal removes the district court’s authority over the issues involved in that appeal.
The court therefore denied Cathay Pacific’s motion for leave to file a reconsideration motion without prejudice. Judge Joseph C. Spero issued the order on June 28, 2021.
The detailed version
- Herrera v. Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd. · No. 3:20-cv-03019
- Joseph Spero
- June 28, 2021
Background
Cathay Pacific Airways Ltd. asked for permission to file a motion for reconsideration of the court’s May 28, 2021 order. That earlier order had denied Cathay Pacific’s motion to dismiss or, alternatively, to require arbitration. Cathay Pacific then filed a notice of appeal from the May 28 order in the Ninth Circuit.
Court’s Reasoning
The district court explained that the motion for reconsideration and the appeal challenged the same decision. It relied on Ninth Circuit authority providing that an interlocutory appeal removes the district court’s jurisdiction over the particular issues involved in that appeal. “Jurisdiction” here means the court’s authority to act on those issues.
Disposition
Because the appeal deprived the district court of jurisdiction over the issues raised in the motion, the court denied without prejudice Cathay Pacific’s motion for leave to file a motion for reconsideration. The order was issued by Judge Joseph C. Spero.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.