Mescall v. Bureau of Prisons et al, No. 2:2020cv11477 - Document 32 (E.D. Mich. 2020)
Court Description: Opinion and Order Denying 28 Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by District Judge Victoria A. Roberts. (LVer)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Mescall v. Bureau of Prisons et al Doc. 32 Case 2:20-cv-11477-VAR-DRG ECF No. 32, PageID.161 Filed 11/23/20 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION SEAN F. MESCALL, Plaintiff, Case No. 2:20-CV-11477 HONORABLE VICTORIA A. ROBERTS v. BUREAU OF PRISONS, et. al, Defendants. ____________________________/ OPINION AND ORDER DENYING THE MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (ECF No. 28) Plaintiff’s civil rights complaint was dismissed without prejudice on September 21, 2020, when Plaintiff failed to timely correct a filing fee deficiency by either paying the filing fee or submitting an application to proceed without prepayment of fees and costs and supporting documentation. Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal (ECF No. 29). Petitioner also filed a motion for reconsideration. For the reasons that follow, the motion for reconsideration is denied. Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal; this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider the motion for reconsideration. A notice of appeal generally “confers jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the district court of control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal.” Marrese v. American Academy of Orthopaedic 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 2:20-cv-11477-VAR-DRG ECF No. 32, PageID.162 Filed 11/23/20 Page 2 of 2 Surgeons, 470 U.S. 373, 379 (1985)(citing Griggs v. Provident Consumer Discount Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982)(per curiam)); see also Workman v. Tate, 958 F.2d 164, 167 (6th Cir. 1992). Plaintiff filed a notice of appeal; this Court lacks jurisdiction to amend its original opinion and order to consider the merits of the case. Workman, 958 F.2d at 167-68; see also Raum v. Norwood, 93 F. App’x 693, 695 (6th Cir. 2004)(Plaintiffs deprived district court of jurisdiction over their motion for reconsideration by filing notice of appeal before district court had chance to make decision on motion to reconsider). Based upon the foregoing, the motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 28) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Victoria A. Roberts Victoria A. Roberts United States District Judge Dated: 11/23/2020 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
