Perez v. Padilla

Filing 54

ORDER on Plaintiff's 52 Letter signed by Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean on 6/13/2017. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

10

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

11
12
13
14
15
16

Case No. 1:14-cv-01730-DAD-EPG (PC)

JOSEPH PEREZ,

ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S LETTER
(ECF NO. 52)

Plaintiff,
v.
R. PADILLA,
Defendant.

17
18

Joseph Perez (“Plaintiff”) is a former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

19

pauperis in this civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 6, 2017, Plaintiff

20

filed a letter to the Court. (ECF No. 52). Plaintiff asks the Court to reopen his case.

21

However, Plaintiff’s case was never dismissed. It is still open. In fact, on June 9, 2017,

22

the assigned district judge (Judge Dale A. Drozd) adopted this Court’s findings and

23

recommendations, and denied Defendant’s motion to dismiss. (ECF Nos. 47 & 53). This means

24

the case will go on at this time.

25

Plaintiff’s appeal of this Court’s order denying Plaintiff’s request for counsel was

26

dismissed (ECF Nos. 48 & 51). However, the Court cannot reconsider an order from the Ninth

27

Circuit Court of Appeals.

28

Plaintiff also asserts that his appeal should have been filed with the Fifth Circuit Court of
1

1

Appeals instead of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Plaintiff is incorrect. This court resides in

2

the Eastern District of California. Appeals of this Court’s decisions are heard by Ninth Circuit

3

Court of Appeals. Those are all federal courts. The 5th District Court of Appeal is located in

4

Fresno, but it is a state appellate court and does not hear appeals from this Court.

5

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the relief sought in Plaintiff’s letter is DENIED.

6
7
8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

June 13, 2017

/s/
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2