Tracy Taylor v. Hubbard et al
Filing
46
ORDER Disregarding Plaintiff's Letter To The Court (ECF No. 45 ), signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 4/25/2012. (Fahrney, E)
1
2
3
4
5
6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
TRACY TAYLOR,
10
CASE NO. 1:10-cv–00404-BAM PC
Plaintiff,
11
ORDER DISREGARDING PLAINTIFF’S
LETTER TO THE COURT
v.
(ECF No. 45)
12
SUSAN HUBBARD, et al.,
13
Defendants.
/
14
15
Plaintiff Tracy Taylor is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil
16
rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on March 8, 2010. An order
17
issued on November 15, 2011, finding the first amended complaint stated claims against Defendants
18
Harrington and Wegman, and Defendants have been served. On March 23, 2012, Plaintiff filed a
19
motion to amend his compliant. On April 2, 2012, the court granted Defendants motion to extend
20
time to respond to the complaint until the court granted or denied Plaintiff’s motion to amend. On
21
April 23, 2012, Plaintiff filed a letter to the court stating that he has been retaliated against by being
22
transferred from Kern Valley State Prison. Plaintiff is advised that a document requesting a court
23
order must be styled as a motion, not a letter. The motion should state, as clearly as possible, the
24
relief sought.
25
It is unclear what action, if any, Plaintiff seeks in the letter filed April 23, 2012. Thus,
26
Plaintiff’s letter shall be disregarded. To the extent that Plaintiff wishes the court to take any action,
27
Plaintiff must file a motion requesting the desired relief.
28
///
1
1
2
3
4
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s letter, filed April 23, 2012, is
disregarded, as it appears to the court that no action is requested.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
cm411
April 25, 2012
/s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
5
6
7
8
9
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?