Nuscience Corp v. Robert Henkel

Good Law
585 F. App'x 573
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 24, 201412-56405California470 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Robert Henkel appeals the district court’s denial of his motion to set aside the default judgment against him and to dismiss the underlying action against him for lack of personal jurisdiction. Because Henkel’s notice of appeal was untimely, we dismiss his appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We also deny NuScience Corporation’s motion for appellate sanctions.

Notice of appeal must be filed “within 30 days after the entry of the judgment or order appealed from.” Fed. R.App. P. 4(a)(1)(A). Henkel filed his notice of appeal on July 30, 2012, more than 30 days after the district court’s June 15, 2012 order denying the motion to vacate default judgment. Henkel’s appeal was therefore untimely.

Henkel’s time to appeal was not tolled by his attorney Stephen Abraham’s Rule 60(b) motion requesting relief from the district court’s order holding Abraham in contempt. The district court’s June 15 ruling contained two orders: (1) an order denying Henkel’s motion to vacate the default judgment, and (2) an order finding Abraham in contempt of court. Abraham’s Rule 60(b) motion for relief from the contempt order could toll the time to file an appeal only from the disposition underlying…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.