Shehee v. Flores, et al.

Filing 20

ORDER STRIKING Document for Violation of Informational Order 19 , signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 03/17/2015. (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

GREGORY ELL SHEHEE,

12
13
14

1:14-cv-00589-LJO-GSA-PC

Plaintiff,

ORDER STRIKING DOCUMENT FOR
VIOLATION OF INFORMATIONAL
ORDER
(Doc. 19.)

vs.
RAUL FLORES, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17
18
19
20
21

Gregory Ell Shehee (“Plaintiff”) is a Fresno County Jail inmate, proceeding pro se with

22

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing

23

this action on April 23, 2014. (Doc. 1.)

24

On March 10, 2015, Plaintiff filed a document notifying the court of his need for access

25

to the library and his legal documents. (Doc. 19.) The document refers to multiple case

26

numbers, and the caption on the front page names one of Plaintiff‟s other cases titled Shehee

27

vs. Ahlin, indicating that Plaintiff expects the court to consider the same document in multiple

28

cases. (Id.)
1

1
2

Plaintiff may not submit documents for multiple cases in this manner. As Plaintiff was
informed in the court‟s Informational Order issued on April 24, 2014:
“If a party has more than one case pending and wants to file the
same document in more than one case, the party must provide a
separate copy of that document, with the correct case number in
the first page caption, for each case. Documents with more than
one case number in the caption may be stricken/returned. . . . A
document which is „stricken‟ will not be considered by the Court
for any purpose.”

3
4
5
6
7

8
9

(Informational Order, Doc. 3 at 2 ¶II.A, F.) Plaintiff was also previously advised in the court‟s
January 12, 2015 order not to refer to multiple cases in one document.1 (Doc. 14.)

10

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff‟s document filed on March 10,

11

2015 in this action is STRICKEN from the record for violation of the court‟s Informational

12

Order.

13
14
15

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

March 17, 2015

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22

23
24
25
26
27
28

1

In fact, Plaintiff‟s prior motion filed on January 5, 2015 was stricken by the court for the same
violation of the Informational Order. (Docs. 13, 14.)
2