Opinion
6:19-cv-1635-CEM-LHP
04-03-2023
USHA JAIN and MANOHAR JAIN, Plaintiffs, v. DONALD MYERS, HEATHER HIGBEE, JOHN KEST, KEVIN WEISS, MR. WERT, MYA HATCHETTE, RENEE ROCHE, DAVID BARKER, MARY BETH VALLEY, MICHAEL FURBUSH and ROETZEL AND ANDRESS PA, Defendants
ORDER
LESLIE HOFFMAN PRICE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
This cause came on for consideration without oral argument on the following motions filed herein:
MOTION: PLAINTIFF JAINS' REQUEST TO TRANSMIT THE COMPLETE RECORDS TO APPEAL COURT FOR APPEAL NO. 21-11719 INCLUDING ALL THE FILINGS WHICH ARE NOT DOCKETED IN THE COURT RECORD AND ALSO ALL THE FILINGS FROM 6:21-CV-00336 AND THE MISCELLANEOUS CASE 6:21-MC-00071. (Doc. No. 307)
FILED: November 29, 2022
THEREON it is ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART.
MOTION: PLAINTIFF JAINS' REQUEST TO CORRECT THE CAUSE OF ACTION FROM 28 U.SC. § 1443 INSTEAD OF 1441 FOR FEDERAL REMOVAL SUIT FILED ON FEBRUARY 18, 2021. (Doc. No. 308)
FILED: December 1, 2022
THEREON it is ORDERED that the motion is DENIED.
MOTION: PLAINTIFF JAINS' REQUEST TO TRANSMIT THE RECORDS TO APPELLATE COURT WITH CORRECT CAPTION. (Doc. No. 309)
FILED: December 1, 2022
THEREON it is ORDERED that the motion is DENIED.
With respect to Plaintiffs' request that the Clerk transmit the entire record to the Court of Appeals, (Doc. No. 307), Plaintiffs' appeal was reinstated on December 22, 2022, (Doc. No. 312), and it appears that the Clerk's office has already transmitted all relevant documents to the Court of Appeals. See Doc. No. 278. The only document Plaintiffs identify that may have some bearing on the appeal at issue (Case No. 21-11719), is the Court's August 25, 2022 Order (Doc. No. 280). The Clerk is therefore DIRECTED to transmit a copy of the August 25, 2022 Order to the Court of Appeals for consideration with that appeal. Plaintiffs do not explain how the remaining documents - many of which relate to separately filed cases and/or relate to issues collateral to the appeal at issue - should be part of the appeal in Case No. 21-11719. Nor have Plaintiffs provided a memorandum of legal authority as required by Local Rule 3.01(a). Moreover, if the Court of Appeals determines that it requires any further documents, it will notify the Clerk and request a certified record as provided by Fed. R. App. P. 11 and 11th Cir. R. 11-2 and 11-3.
Plaintiffs' request to change the cause of action from 28 U.S.C. § 1441 to 28 U.S.C. § 1443 is likewise lacking in any legal authority in support. Doc. No. 308. Moreover, it appears that a similar motion was previously denied by the Court of Appeals. See Doc. No. 312. And Plaintiffs' request to change the case caption (Doc. No. 309) is likewise denied for lack of legal authority in support. With the appeal in this case now reinstated, Plaintiffs must now also demonstrate how this Court has any jurisdiction to modify any prior orders or take any further action in this case while the appeal is pending.
DONE and ORDERED