Jones v. Anorld et al
Filing
10
ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 9 Motion to Admit Miscellaneous Records, signed by Chief Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 6/6/17. (Gonzalez, R)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
EDWARD DAVID JONES,
12
13
14
15
Plaintiff,
Case No. 1:16-cv-00473-LJO-BAM (PC)
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION
TO ADMIT MISCELLANEOUS RECORDS
v.
(ECF No. 9)
ERIC ARNOLD, et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
Plaintiff Edward David Jones (“Plaintiff”), a state prisoner proceeding pro se, initiated this
18
civil action on April 1, 2016. On August 4, 2016, the Court dismissed this action as duplicative
19
of case number 1:16-cv-00469-DAD-BAM. (ECF No. 3.) Judgment was entered accordingly
20
that same day. (ECF No. 4.) Plaintiff has since filed various miscellaneous motions, which the
21
Court has construed as motions for reconsideration and denied. (ECF Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8.)
22
Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to admit miscellaneous records, filed on
23
May 30, 2017. Again, Plaintiff’s motion is difficult to understand, but Plaintiff refers to the lack
24
of supervision of inmates by floor staff officers, contraband among inmates, inmate assaults, and
25
the death of Plaintiff’s mother after contracting Valley Fever. Plaintiff appears to request an
26
investigation into an alleged assault on March 13, 2017 that resulted in serious bodily injury.
27
Plaintiff attaches various exhibits. (ECF No. 9.) Plaintiff states that he admits these reports,
28
records and documentation “for review.” (Id. at 1.)
1
1
This action has now been closed for ten months. The motion concerns events occurring
2
long after the action was closed, events unrelated to this action, and events already found to be
3
duplicative of case number 1:16-cv-00469-DAD-BAM.
4
Plaintiff is advised that the Court will not serve as a repository for evidence. Parties may
5
not file evidence with the Court until it becomes necessary to do so in connection with a motion
6
for summary judgment, trial, or the Court requests otherwise. This action is closed and it is not
7
necessary for Plaintiff to submit evidence in connection with a motion for summary judgment or
8
trial.
9
To the extent Plaintiff believes he is in danger, or wishes to raise new claims against new
10
defendants, he has other avenues or relief available to him, including filing a new action. The
11
issue is not that Plaintiff’s allegations are not serious or that Plaintiff is not entitled to relief if
12
sought in the proper forum. The issue is that this action cannot be used by Plaintiff to obtain the
13
relief he seeks.
14
Plaintiff is reminded that the Court will not entertain another motion to reconsider the
15
judgment in this case based on arguments the Court has previously rejected, nor will it entertain
16
motions on matters completely unrelated to this case.
17
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion to admit miscellaneous records, filed on May 30, 2017
18
(Doc. 9), is HEREBY DENIED. Plaintiff is advised that should he continue to submit unrelated
19
documents in this closed action, his documents will be returned to him without being filed with
20
the Court and he may be subject to sanctions.
21
22
23
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____
June 6, 2017
UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
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?