Adams v. Bush et al
ORDER DENYING 10 Motion for Reconsideration and DENYING 11 Motion to Transfer Case. Signed by Honorable P. K. Holmes, III on September 16, 2013. Copy of order mailed to non-CM/ECF participant. (jas)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
DALE B. ADAMS
Case No. 3:12-CV-03113
GEORGE BUSH, U.S. President; JOHN NEGROPONTE,
Director of National Intelligence; KEITH B. ALEXANDER,
Lt. General; ALBERTO GONZALES, U.S. Attorney General;
MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, U.S. Attorney General; ROBERT
MUELLER, U.S. Director – FBI; VALERIE CAPRONI,
Officer of General Counsel – FBI; ROBERT GATES, U.S.
Secretary of Defense; CONDOLEEZA RICE, U.S. Secretary
of State; MICHAEL CHERTOFF, U.S. Dept. of Homeland
Security Administrator; KAREN TANDY, Drug Enforcement
Agency Administrator; and ANY UNKNOWN NAMED
Currently before the Court are Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 10) for reconsideration and motion
(Doc. 11) to transfer.
Under Rule 60(b), a party may be relieved from an order of the Court under certain
enumerated circumstances, including the existence of “mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable
neglect” or “any other reason that justifies relief.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)(1) and (6). Rule 60(b)
“provides for extraordinary relief which may be granted only upon an adequate showing of
exceptional circumstances.” United States v. Young, 806 F.2d 805, 806 (8th Cir. 1986). None of
the circumstances envisioned by Rule 60(b) for finding that reconsideration may be warranted are
present in this case, and relief is not otherwise justified. The Court addressed Plaintiff’s earlier
objections to the magistrate’s Report and Recommendation in its order (Doc. 9) adopting the report
and recommendations. Plaintiff’s motion sets forth no comprehensible, new, compelling grounds
for the Court to amend that Order.
Plaintiff also moves to transfer all his pending civil cases to the U.S. District Court for the
District of Columbia. The Court cannot find that a transfer of this case would further the interests
of justice at this time. If Plaintiff wishes to dismiss this case and/or believes this Court lacks
jurisdiction, he should file a succinct motion to dismiss.
For the reasons set forth above, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 10) for
reconsideration is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion (Doc. 11) to transfer is DENIED.
If Plaintiff wishes to continue pursuing this case in this Court, he is ordered to pay a $350.00
filing fee1 by Monday, September 23, 2013. Plaintiff is advised that if he fails to comply with this
Order by that deadline, his Complaint will be dismissed without prejudice for failure to obey a court
order. No further motions for reconsideration will be considered in this case on this issue. Any such
motions that are filed will be summarily denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 16th day of September, 2013.
s/P. K. Holmes, III
P.K. HOLMES, III
CHIEF U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
Although the fee is currently $400, the Court will order Plaintiff to pay the fee in effect at
the time he filed his complaint in this case.
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?