Soto v. Ritter

Filing 22

ORDER that to the extent that Plaintiff seeks any relief in his request (Doc. 18 ), such relief is denied. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 8/13/2013.(KMG)

Soto v. Ritter

Doc. 22

1
2

MGD

WO

3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

8
9

Christopher J. Soto, Sr.,

10
11
12
13

No. CV 13-0692-PHX-DGC (MEA)

Plaintiff,
vs.

ORDER

Matt Ritter,
Defendant.

14
15

On April 4, 2013, Plaintiff Christopher J. Soto, Sr., who is confined in the Pinal

16

County Jail in Florence, Arizona, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42

17

U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. 1) and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2). In an

18

Order dated May 20, 2013, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint for failure to state a

19

claim and instructed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment accordingly. (Doc. 14.)

20

Judgment was entered on that same day. (Doc. 16.)

21

On June 21, 2013, Plaintiff filed a document titled “Requesting the Decree of

22

Assurance” (Doc. 18), in which he asks the Court “what procedures have been ordered by

23

the courts to assure that plaintiff’s claim has been resolved and will not accure (sic) as

24

problems do still show adverse affect to the Plaintiff.” Plaintiff cites to Friends of the

25

Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc., 528 U.S. 167 (2000), and

26

asks the Court to submit “a decree outlining the assurance that these violations will not

27

accure pursu[]ant to [Laidlaw].”

28

Dockets.Justia.com

1

Plaintiff’s Complaint was dismissed for failure to state a claim against his criminal

2

defense attorney and this case was closed on May 20, 2013. Plaintiff’s request provides

3

no basis for reconsideration of the dismissal of this action or any other relief.

4
5
6

IT IS ORDERED that to the extent that Plaintiff seeks any relief in his request
(Doc. 18), such relief is denied.
Dated this 13th day of August, 2013.

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

-2-