Anderson

Anderson v. Big Apple Consulting, USA, Inc.

Good Law
237 F. App'x 127
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 27, 2006No. 05-16057California249 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Big Apple Consulting USA, Inc., and Matthew Maguire (collectively “Big Apple”) appeal from the district court’s denial of a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction an action filed against them under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968 . We do not have jurisdiction over this interlocutory appeal.

28 U.S.C. § 1292 (b) provides the procedure for appeal of an interlocutory order: *128 the district judge must certify the interlocutory order for appeal, and upon application within ten days of the certification order the court of appeals may in its discretion permit an appeal to be taken. Because Big Apple did not obtain leave to bring an appeal from the interlocutory order denying its motion to dismiss, we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. See Lucas v. Natoli 936 F.2d 432, 433 (9th Cir.1991) (per curiam) (court has no jurisdiction to reach issues of personal jurisdiction not certified for interlocutory appeal); Hughes v. Sharp, 476 F.2d 975, 975 (9th Cir.1973) (no jurisdiction when party did not seek leave to bring appeal of interlocutory order); cf. Go-Video, Inc. v. Akai Elec. Co., 885 F.2d 1406, 1408 (9th Cir.1989)…

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.