McAleenan

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 AL OTRO LADO, INC., et al., Case No. 17-cv-2366-BAS-KSC

Plaintiffs,

ORDER:

v. 1. DENYING PLAINTIFFS’

REQUEST FOR INDICATIVE

CHAD F. WOLF, et al.,

RULING,

Defendants. 2. GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’

MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM

JUDGMENT

17 (ECF No. 842)

19 Before this Court is Plaintiffs’ Motion for Relief from Judgement and Request for Indicative Ruling. (ECF No. 842.) Now that the Ninth Circuit has issued its final mandate (ECF No. 852), this Court once again retains jurisdiction over the action, Mariscal-Sandoval v. Ashcroft, 370 F.3d 851, 856 (9th Cir. 2004) (“Until the mandate issues, [the circuit court] retain[s] jurisdiction.”). Therefore, Plaintiffs’ Request for Indicative Ruling is DENIED as moot because an appeal is no longer pending in this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 62.1(a)(3) (authorizing indicative rulings when “the court lacks authority” because of a “pending” 28 …