Calloway v. Scribner et al
Filing
54
ORDER denying 47 Motion for Reconsideration signed by Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck on 10/15/2014. (Lundstrom, T)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JAMISIS JERMAINE CALLOWAY,
12
Plaintiff,
13
Case No. 1:11-cv-00803 DLB PC
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
v.
[ECF No. 47]
14
A. K. SCRIBNER, et al.,
15
Defendants.
16
Plaintiff Jamisis Jermaine Calloway (“Plaintiff”) is a California state prisoner proceeding pro
17
18
se in this civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed this action on May 17, 2011.1
On May 9, 2013, Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of the Court’s March 11, 2013,
19
20
order granting Defendant Chen’s motion to dismiss. The undersigned denied the motion for
21
reconsideration on August 25, 2014. On September 12, 2014, Plaintiff filed a motion for
22
reconsideration by the district judge of the undersigned’s order denying his motion for
23
reconsideration. Plaintiff is advised that this case has been referred to the undersigned to conduct
24
any and all proceedings, including entry of judgment, insofar as both parties have consented to the
25
jurisdiction of the magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). According to 28 U.S.C. §
26
636(c)(3) and Local Rule 305(c), Plaintiff’s avenue is to seek relief with the Ninth Circuit Court of
27
Appeals.
28
1
On June 1, 2011, Plaintiff consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge. On February 21, 2013, and February
26, 2013, Defendants Allison, Salama, and Chen consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge.
1
1
2
ORDER
Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration is DENIED.
3
4
5
6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Dennis
October 15, 2014
L. Beck
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?