Maisano v. Hoyt et al
Filing
3
ORDER REASSIGNING AND DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Case reassigned to Senior Judge Robert C Broomfield for all further proceedings. Judge Raner C Collins no longer assigned to case. Clerk must file this order in this case, enter judgment a ccordingly, and close the case. Clerk shall accept no further documents for filing in this case, other than those in furtherance of an appeal. Signed by Senior Judge Robert C Broomfield on 4/8/2014. ( A copy of this document mailed to Dale Maisano on this date). (ADI-MLH, )
1
WO
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
ORDER
9
10
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01655-TUC-RCB
11
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01656-TUC-RCB
12
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01657-TUC-RCB
13
Maisano v. Brewer, et al.
No.
14-01658-TUC-RCB
14
Maisano v. Towner, et al.
No.
14-01659-TUC-RCB
15
Maisano v. Towner, et al.
No.
14-01660-TUC-RCB
16
Maisano v. Towner, et al.
No.
14-01661-TUC-RCB
17
Maisano v. Bonorand, et al.
No.
14-01662-TUC-RCB
18
Maisano v. Bonorand, et al.
No.
14-01663-TUC-RCB
19
Maisano v. Zevallos, et al.
No.
14-01668-TUC-RCB
20
Maisano v. Zevallos, et al.
No.
14-01669-TUC-RCB
21
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01670-TUC-RCB
22
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01671-TUC-RCB
23
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01672-TUC-RCB
24
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc.
No.
14-01673-TUC-RCB
25
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01674-TUC-RCB
26
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01675-TUC-RCB
27
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01676-TUC-RCB
28
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01677-TUC-RCB
1
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01678-TUC-RCB
2
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01679-TUC-RCB
3
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc.
No.
14-01680-TUC-RCB
4
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01681-TUC-RCB
5
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc.
No.
14-01682-TUC-RCB
6
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01683-TUC-RCB
7
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01684-TUC-RCB
8
Maisano v. Modrzejewski, et al.
No.
14-01685-TUC-RCB
9
Maisano v. Modrzejewski, et al.
No.
14-01686-TUC-RCB
10
Maisano v. Modrzejewski, et al.
No.
14-01687-TUC-RCB
11
Maisano v. Modrzejewski, et al.
No.
14-01688-TUC-RCB
12
Maisano v. Modrzejewski, et al.
No.
14-01689-TUC-RCB
13
Maisano v. Modrzejewski, et al.
No.
14-01690-TUC-RCB
14
Maisano v. Modrzejewski, et al.
No.
14-01691-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Schroeder, et al.
No.
14-01692-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Anderson, et al.
No.
14-01693-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Bonorand, et al.
No.
14-01694-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Bonorand, et al.
No.
14-01695-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Deebom, et al.
No.
14-01696-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Deebom, et al.
No.
14-01697-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01698-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01699-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01700-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01701-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01702-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01703-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01704-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01705-TUC-RCB
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
1
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01706-TUC-RCB
2
Maisano v. Hoyt, et al.
No.
14-01707-TUC-RCB
3
Maisano v. Hoyt, et al.
No.
14-01708-TUC-RCB
4
Maisano v. Towner, et al.
No.
14-01709-TUC-RCB
5
Maisano v. Towner, et al.
No.
14-01710-TUC-RCB
6
Maisano v. Towner, et al.
No.
14-01711-TUC-RCB
7
Maisano v. Trinity Grp./Canteen Food
No.
Servs., et al.
14-01712-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Trinity Grp./Canteen Food
No.
Servs., et al.
14-01713-TUC-RCB
10
Maisano v. Ryan, et al.
No.
14-01714-TUC-RCB
11
Maisano v. Ryan, et al.
No.
14-01715-TUC-RCB
12
Maisano v. Ryan, et al.
No.
14-01716-TUC-RCB
13
Maisano v. Ryan, et al.
No.
14-01717-TUC-RCB
14
Maisano v. Ryan, et al.
No.
14-01718-TUC-RCB
15
Maisano v. Ryan, et al.
No.
14-01719-TUC-RCB
16
Maisano v. Ryan, et al.
No.
14-01720-TUC-RCB
17
Maisano v. Canteen/Trinity Corr. Food
No.
Servs. Inc.
14-01721-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Canteen/Trinity Corr. Food
No.
Servs. Inc.
14-01722-TUC-RCB
21
Maisano v. Canteen/Trinity Corr. Food
No.
Servs. Inc.
14-01723-TUC-RCB
22
Maisano v. Vega, et al.
No.
14-01724-TUC-RCB
23
Maisano v. Vega, et al.
No.
14-01725-TUC-RCB
24
Maisano v. Vega, et al.
No.
14-01726-TUC-RCB
25
Maisano v. Vega, et al.
No.
14-01727-TUC-RCB
26
Maisano v. Vega, et al.
No.
14-01728-TUC-RCB
27
Maisano v. Vega, et al.
No.
14-01729-TUC-RCB
28
Maisano v. Modrzejewski, et al.
No.
14-01731-TUC-RCB
8
9
18
19
20
-3-
1
Maisano v. Modrzejewski, et al.
No.
14-01732-TUC-RCB
2
Maisano v. Modrzejewski, et al.
No.
14-01733-TUC-RCB
3
Maisano v. Modrzejewski, et al.
No.
14-01734-TUC-RCB
4
Maisano v. Modrzejewski, et al.
No.
14-01735-TUC-RCB
5
Maisano v. Modrzejewski, et al.
No.
14-01736-TUC-RCB
6
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc.
No.
14-01737-TUC-RCB
7
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc.
No.
14-01738-TUC-RCB
8
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc.
No.
14-01739-TUC-RCB
9
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01740-TUC-RCB
10
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01741-TUC-RCB
11
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01742-TUC-RCB
12
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01744-TUC-RCB
13
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01745-TUC-RCB
14
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01746-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01747-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Corizon Health Inc., et al.
No.
14-01748-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01749-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01750-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01751-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01752-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01753-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01754-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Clark, et al.
No.
14-01755-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Trinity Grp./Canteen Food
No.
Servs., et al.
14-01756-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Trinity Grp./Canteen Food
No.
Servs., et al.
14-01757-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Canteen/Trinity Corr. Food
No.
Servs. Inc., et al.
14-01758-TUC-RCB
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-4-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Maisano v. Canteen/Trinity Corr. Food
No.
Servs. Inc., et al.
14-01759-TUC-RCB
Maisano v. Ryan, et al.
14-01760-TUC-RCB
No.
With the undersigned’s consent, United States District Court Chief Judge Raner C.
Collins has directed that the above-captioned cases be reassigned to the undersigned
pursuant to Local Rule of Civil Procedure 42.1(e)(3).
Plaintiff Dale Maisano, who is confined in the Arizona State Prison ComplexLewis in Buckeye, Arizona, has so often and egregiously abused the legal process in the
past that on August 11, 1992, Senior United States District Judge Stephen M. McNamee
entered an Order and Restraining Order enjoining him from filing any civil action in this
or any other federal court without first obtaining leave of the court. See August 11, 1992
Order and Restraining Order in Maisano v. Lewis, CV 92-1026-PHX-SMM (MS).
Pursuant to the Restraining Order, to obtain leave to file, Plaintiff must file an
“Application Pursuant to Court Order Seeking Leave to File” accompanied by an
affidavit certifying: (1) “that the claim or claims he wishes to present are new and have
never been raised and disposed of on the merits by any federal court”; and (2) “that to the
best of his knowledge the claim or claims are not frivolous or taken in bad faith.”
Additionally, any application seeking leave to file must be accompanied by a copy of the
August 11, 1992 Order and Restraining Order in Maisano v. Lewis, CV 92-1026-PHXSMM (MS).1 In addition, Plaintiff “must attach to future complaints a list of all cases
previously filed involving similar or related causes of action.” “Failure to comply
strictly with the terms of the [Restraining Order] will be sufficient ground to deny
leave to file.” (Emphasis added.)
Plaintiff lodged a civil rights Complaint (Doc. 1)2 in each of the above-captioned
cases. Plaintiff did not file an Application Pursuant to Court Order Seeking Leave to
1
Plaintiff appealed the final judgment in CV 92-1026-PHX-SMM (MS) to the
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. On March 17, 1993, the Court lodged a certified copy of
the Ninth Circuit’s mandate dismissing the appeal.
2
In light of Plaintiff’s history of vexatious litigation and the frequency with which
-5-
1
File, a copy of the August 11, 1992 Order and Restraining Order, or a list of his
2
previously filed cases involving similar or related causes of action. Plaintiff, therefore,
3
has failed to comply strictly with the Court-mandated pre-filing requirements. Thus,
4
these actions will be dismissed without prejudice.
5
IT IS ORDERED:
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
(1)
The Clerk of Court must reassign these cases to the undersigned pursuant
to Local Rule of Civil Procedure 42.1(e)(3).
(2)
These cases are dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court must
file this Order in each case, enter judgment accordingly, and close these cases.
(3)
The Clerk of Court must accept no further documents for filing in
these cases, other than those in furtherance of an appeal.
DATED this 8th day of April, 2014.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
he lodges complaints, the Clerk of Court has been directed to docket only the name of the
first named Defendant in each case because entering onto the docket all of the Defendants
named in each lodged Complaint needlessly wastes the Court’s limited resources. The
Clerk of Court has made a notation on the docket that the list of defendants on the docket
sheet is only a partial list. Similarly, the Clerk of Court has also been directed to cease
sending Plaintiff a Notice of Assignment in each new case he files because Plaintiff’s
new lawsuits filed in the Tucson Division of the District of Arizona are initially directly
assigned to Chief Judge Collins, see Local Rule of Civil Procedure 3.8(e); given his
litigation history, Plaintiff is well aware of the warnings contained in the Notice of
Assignment; and sending a Notice of Assignment in each of Plaintiff’s new cases wastes
the Court’s limited resources.
-6-
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?