Mattox v. Martinez et al

Filing 14

ORDER DENYING 13 Motion for Reconsideration, and PROHIBITING Further Filings in This Action, Which was Opened in Error and is Duplicative of Case Number 1:08-cv-01265-FRZ signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 11/9/2009. (Bradley, A)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 This action, brought by John Dean Mattox pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, was opened in error 16 on May 8, 2009, and dismissed on July 21, 2009, as duplicative of earlier-filed case number 1:08-cv17 01265-FRZ. On August 24, 2009, Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration, and requested that he 18 be allowed to proceed either in 1:08-cv-01265-FRZ or in this action. 19 As a pro se litigant, Plaintiff's confusion over the proceedings in his two cases is 20 understandable. This action was opened in error when the Court received what was intended to be 21 an amended complaint in 1:08-cv-01265-FRZ but which did not bear a case number. Subsequently, 22 1:08-cv-01265-FRZ was dismissed based on Plaintiff 's apparent failure to file an amended 23 complaint. The error was brought to light based on Plaintiff's communication filed July 15, 2009, 24 and this case was closed. 25 In the order closing this case, Plaintiff was notified that he needed to await a ruling on his 26 motion for reconsideration, which had been filed in 1:08-cv-01265-FRZ on July 15, 2009. At the 27 /// 28 1 v. E. MARTINEZ, et al., Defendants. (Doc. 13) / JOHN DEAN MATTOX, Plaintiff, CASE NO. 1:09-cv-00816-LJO-GSA PC ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION, AND PROHIBITING FURTHER FILINGS IN THIS ACTION, WHICH WAS OPENED IN ERROR AND IS DUPLICATIVE OF CASE NUMBER 1:08-cv01265-FRZ

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

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

time Plaintiff filed this motion for reconsideration on August 24, 2009, his motion in 1:08-cv-01265FRZ was still pending. However, on October 26, 2009, the Honorable Frank R. Zapata granted Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration in 1:08-cv-01265-FRZ, re-opened the case, and screened the amended complaint. As a result of Judge Zapata's order, Plaintiff is once again proceeding with his earlier-filed case. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. 2. Plaintiff 's motion for reconsideration, filed August 24, 2009, is DENIED; and There shall be no further filings in this action, which was opened in error and is duplicative of case number 1:08-cv-01265-FRZ.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: b9ed48 November 9, 2009 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2