Mothershed v. Oklahoma, State of et al

Filing 44

ORDER denying 43 plaintiff's Motion to Amend Findings and Conclusions. Signed by Judge Frederick J Martone on 07/19/12.(KAR)

Download PDF
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 George L. Mothershed, 9 Plaintiff, 10 vs. 11 12 13 14 State of Oklahoma et al, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. CV 12-549-PHX-FJM ORDER 15 The court has before it plaintiff's "Motion to Amend Findings and Conclusions of 16 Law(Verified)" (doc. 43). But Rule 52(b), Fed. R. Civ. P. applies to the amendment of 17 Findings and Conclusions made under Rule 52(a), Fed. R. Civ. P. Such Findings and 18 Conclusions are made, for example, in actions tried to the court without a jury. We made no 19 findings and conclusions under Rule 52(a). Instead, we granted a motion to dismiss. Thus, 20 there are no findings to amend. Accordingly, it is ORDERED DENYING plaintiff's Motion 21 to Amend Findings and Conclusions. (Doc. 43). 22 We have already denied plaintiff's Motion to amend the judgment and Motion for 23 reconsideration. (Doc. 42). Plaintiff's remedy, if any, is to seek further review in the United 24 States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 25 26 27 28 DATED this 19th day of July, 2012.

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?