Magnabosco v. Atlantic Richfield Co.

Full title: Louis M. MAGNABOSCO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY…

Court: United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Jul 26, 2001

14 F. App'x 956 (9th Cir. 2001)

Opinion

14 Fed.Appx. 956 (9th Cir. 2001) Louis M. MAGNABOSCO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY; Katalistiks Inc.; Union Carbide Corp.; Allied Signal Corp.; Universal Oil Products; UOP, a Joint Venture; W.R. Grace & Co., Conn., Defendants-Appellees. No. 99-56885. D.C. No. CV-94-07944-WDK. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. July 26, 2001

Submitted April 4, 2001. ^*

* The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION. (See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure Rule 36-3)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, William D. Keller, District Judge, Presiding.

Before HUG, DUH§, ^** and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

** The Honorable John M. Duh§, Jr., Senior United States Circuit Judge for the Fifth Circuit, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ^***

*** This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

As a threshold issue, the timeliness of Magnabosco's notice of appeal is raised. Because the minute order dismissing with prejudice Magnabosco's Third Amended Complaint is not an "entry of judgment" under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, the 30-day clock for filing a notice of appeal never began to run. See Radio Television

Page 957.

Espanola, S.A. v. New World Entm't, Ltd., 183 F.3d 922, 932 (9th Cir.1999) (holding that C.D. Cal. Local Rule 14.10.5 precluded minute order from constituting entry of judgment). The minute order in the instant case is identical in all material aspects to the minute order in Radio Television Espanola. Accordingly, it cannot be said that Magnabosco's notice of appeal was untimely. For the same reason, however, this court lacks jurisdiction, for there was no final judgment that could be appealed. See WMX Tech., Inc. v. Miller, 104 F.3d 1133, 1136 (9th Cir.1997) (en banc). This court will not have appellate jurisdiction until such time as a final judgment is entered.

DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.