Hawthorne v. Mendoza-Power et al
Filing
118
ORDER DENYING 91 Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 7/31/2012. (Jessen, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
RALPH KELLY HAWTHORNE, JR.,
CASE NO. 1:07-cv-01101-LJO-DLB PC
10
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION
Plaintiff,
11
12
13
14
v.
(ECF No. 91)
KATHY MENDOZA-POWER, et al.,
Defendants.
15
16
17
Plaintiff Ralph Kelly Hawthorne, Jr., (“Plaintiff”) is a prisoner in the custody of the
18
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”). Plaintiff is proceeding pro
19
se in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 4, 2010, judgment was entered in
20
favor of Defendants Kathy Mendoza-Power and K. Henry and against Plaintiff. On March 15,
21
2010, Plaintiff appealed the judgment. On August 17, 2011, the United States Court of Appeals
22
for the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion,
23
filed October 31, 2011, for reconsideration. ECF No. 91. However, Plaintiff does not seek
24
reconsideration of any specific court order, but moves for an extension of time to complete
25
Plaintiff’s application for bill of costs to the Ninth Circuit.
26
For the following reasons, Plaintiff’s motion is denied. First, the application is to be filed
27
with the circuit clerk, not the district court. Second, in the order reversing the judgment, the
28
Ninth Circuit specifically stated, “The parties shall bear their own costs on appeal.” Thus, it
1
1
appears that Plaintiff is precluded from receiving costs, even though he was successful in his
2
appeal.
Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion, filed October 31, 2011, is
3
4
denied.
5
6
7
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Dennis
July 31, 2012
8
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
DEAC_Signature-END:
9
L. Beck
3b142a
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?