Long v. Amazon.com Services LLC

5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE MICHAEL E. LONG, Case No. C23-209RSL 9 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING MOTION 10 v. FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC, Defendant.

14 This matter comes before the Court on plaintiff’s “Motion for Judicial Review” (Dkt.

15 # 48). The Court, having reviewed the submissions of the parties and the remainder of the record, DENIES the motion.

17 The Court lacks jurisdiction to address plaintiff’s motion. “Once a notice of appeal is filed, the district court is divested of jurisdiction over the matters being appealed.” Nat. Res. Def.

19 Council, Inc. v. Sw. Marine Inc., 242 F.3d 1163, 1166 (9th Cir. 2001). On April 29, 2024, this Court entered an order granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissing plaintiff’s discrimination claims as untimely because plaintiff filed his lawsuit more than ninety days after receiving the Right to Sue Notice. Dkt. # 44; 42 U.S.C. § 2000e–5(f)(1). On May 21, 2024, plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal from this Court’s order, Dkts. # 47, and the present motion seeking that this Court declare the “requirement of having to file a [claim] of racial discrimination with the agency before having access to court” as unconstitutional, Dkt. # 48.1 Plaintiff’s Notice of Appeal was docketed first. See Dkt. # 47. Thus, the Court finds that it lost Because the subject matter pending appeal is closely related to the subject matter of the present motion, this Court lacks jurisdiction to decide the issue. See Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc., 242 F.3d at 1166.

4 For all the foregoing reasons, plaintiff’s motion for judicial review (Dkt. # 48) is DENIED.

7 IT IS SO ORDERED.

9 DATED this 13th day of August, 2024.

11 A Robert S. Lasnik 13 United States District Judge

Inc., 242 F.3d at 1166 (holding that the purpose of the rule “is to promote judicial economy and avoid