Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by

KRISTIN M. PERRY; et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Inter v. nor-Plaintiff-Appellee, KQED, INC., Inter

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

D.C. No. 3:09-cv-02292-WHO MEMORANDUM Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
William Horsley Orrick, District Judge, Presiding Submitted April 17, 2019 San Francisco, California Before: FERNANDEZ, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

In light of the district court's briefing and hearing schedule for a future motion to continue to seal the recording at issue, we presently lack jurisdiction over Proponents' appeal. The district court's order compelling "the recordings be kept under seal . . . until August 12, 2020" is not a "final decision[]" of the district court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Nor is it a reviewable collateral order, for the order is not "effectively unreviewable on appeal from a final judgment." U.S. v. Hickey, 185 F.3d 1064, 1066 (9th Cir. 1999). Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed without prejudice for lack of jurisdiction.

DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Perry v. Schwarzenegger
(Apr 19, 2019)