Martinez v. Davey et al
Filing
54
ORDER DENYING 52 Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel and 53 Motion to Join Case AS MOOT signed by Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe on 1/3/2018. (Jessen, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
RICARDO MARTINEZ,
12
Plaintiff,
13
v.
14
D. DAVEY, et al,
15
Case No. 1:16-cv-00084-LJO-BAM (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
TO APPOINT COUNSEL AND MOTION TO
JOIN CASE AS MOOT
(ECF Nos. 52, 53)
Defendants.
16
Plaintiff Ricardo Martinez (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner, proceeded pro se and in forma
17
18
pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 30, 2017, the Court
19
dismissed this action, with prejudice, for failure to state a claim, failure to obey a court order, and
20
failure to prosecute. Judgment was entered pursuant to the Court’s order and the action was
21
closed. (ECF Nos. 48, 49.)
Currently before the Court are two motions filed on December 28, 2017. Plaintiff seeks
22
23
the appointment of counsel to represent him in this action, and further requests that this action be
24
joined with Case No. 1:16-cv-1658-MJS (PC) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a).
25
(ECF Nos. 52, 53.) As this action has been dismissed and the case closed, Plaintiff’s motions are
26
moot.1
27
1
28
The Court further notes that Case No. 1:16-cv-1658-MJS (PC) was closed on September 29, 2017. (Martinez v.
Davey, Case No. 1:16-cv-01658-MJS, Order Dismissing Second Amended Complaint without Leave to Amend,
Clerk to Close Case, Docket No. 27; Judgment, Docket No. 28.)
1
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1.
Plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel, (ECF No. 52), is DENIED; and
3
2.
Plaintiff’s motion to join this case with Case No. 1:16-cv-1658-MJS (PC), (ECF
4
No. 53), is DENIED.
5
6
7
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Barbara
January 3, 2018
A. McAuliffe
_
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?