Kamal K. Patel, federal prisoner # 56496-080, appeals the district court’s and magistrate judge’s (MJ’s) decisions in his Bivens 1 action. Our review of the record, however, shows that it is not yet *18 appropriate for us to consider his arguments.

This court must examine the basis of its jurisdiction sua sponte if necessary. 2 Within 28 days of entry of the MJ’s judgment dismissing Patel’s claims against Joseph Haro, Patel filed a “PROOF OF SERVICE UPON DEFENDANT JOSEPH HARO” (document 126) that is construed as arising under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) and that renders his notice of appeal ineffective until the district court rules on it. 3 Accordingly, this case must be remanded, and the record returned, so that the district court may rule on Patel’s postjudgment motion “as expeditiously as possible, consistent with a just and fair disposition thereof.” 4 We retain jurisdiction over the appeal except for the purposes of the limited remand. Patel’s appeal shall be held in abeyance until his notice of appeal is effective. The clerk of this court is instructed to process the appeal immediately upon the return of this case from the district court.

LIMITED REMAND; APPEAL HELD IN ABEYANCE.