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)

Download PDF
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?