Anderson v. Mendoza, 2:17-cv-1244 KJM DB P. (2019)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20190423883
Visitors: 8
Filed: Apr. 19, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 19, 2019
Summary: ORDER KIMBERLY J. MUELLER , District Judge . On February 12, 2019, this court adopted the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations and dismissed plaintiff's 1983 claims. ECF No. 26. Movant has filed a notice of appeal, ECF No. 28 and a motion for a certificate of appealability, ECF No. 30. Plaintiff does not need a certificate of appealability to appeal this case. The certificate of appealability requirement only applies to claims for habeas corpus relief arising under 28 U.S.C.
Summary: ORDER KIMBERLY J. MUELLER , District Judge . On February 12, 2019, this court adopted the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations and dismissed plaintiff's 1983 claims. ECF No. 26. Movant has filed a notice of appeal, ECF No. 28 and a motion for a certificate of appealability, ECF No. 30. Plaintiff does not need a certificate of appealability to appeal this case. The certificate of appealability requirement only applies to claims for habeas corpus relief arising under 28 U.S.C. ..
More
ORDER
KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge.
On February 12, 2019, this court adopted the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations and dismissed plaintiff's § 1983 claims. ECF No. 26. Movant has filed a notice of appeal, ECF No. 28 and a motion for a certificate of appealability, ECF No. 30.
Plaintiff does not need a certificate of appealability to appeal this case. The certificate of appealability requirement only applies to claims for habeas corpus relief arising under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or § 2255. See Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); see also Hulihan v. Reg'l Transp. Comm'n of S. Nevada, No. 2:09-CV-01096-ECR, 2012 WL 3135681, at *1 (D. Nev. Aug. 1, 2012); Dalluge v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, No. C11-5037RBL, 2011 WL 1675407, at *1 (W.D. Wash. May 4, 2011) ("As this case was brought pursuant to 42 U. S.C. § 1983, there is no requirement for a certificate of appealability."); Jenkins v. Caplan, No. C 02-5603 RMW (PR), 2010 WL 3057410, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 2, 2010) ("[A] Certificate of Appealability is inapplicable to a § 1983 action."). Plaintiff's request for a certificate of appealability, ECF No. 30, is therefore DENIED as moot.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
