Opinion
ORDER
KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff is proceeding in this action without counsel or "pro se." This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302(c)(21). On November 14, 2013, this court issued an order granting plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended complaint, and denying plaintiff's motion to appoint counsel. ECF No. 15. On December 3, 2013, plaintiff filed a notice of interlocutory appeal challenging this court's November 14, 2013 order (ECF No. 16), and a motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis (ECF No. 17).
With regard to plaintiff's motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis, Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(3) provides that "[a] party who was permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in the district-court action... may proceed on appeal in forma pauperis without further authorization." Plaintiff's request to proceed in forma pauperis in this action was granted on February 27, 2013. See ECF No. 3. Because plaintiff is proceeding in forma pauperis in this action in the district court, plaintiff is entitled to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis unless certain exceptions are met. See Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3)(A)-(B). Therefore, plaintiff's motion will be denied as moot.
Plaintiff is hereby cautioned that the filing of his interlocutory appeal with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in no way stays this action. Thus, regardless of the pending appeal, plaintiff is required to timely file an amended complaint in accordance with this court's November 14, 2013 order. See ECF No. 15 (granting plaintiff thirty days in which to file an amended complaint). Failure to do so will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's December 3, 2013 motion to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis (ECF No. 17) is denied as moot.