Moore v. Lamarque, et al

Filing 189

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 5/24/2011 DENYING, as moot, ptnr's 182 request for appointment of counsel and ptnr's 183 request for permission to appeal; and ptnr is ADVISED that documents filed by ptnr since the closing date will be DISREGARDED and no orders will issue in response to future filings. (Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

THOMAS EUGENE MOORE,

10

Petitioner,

11
12

vs.
ROBERT HOREL, et al.,

13

Respondents.

14

ORDER
/

15
16

No. CIV S-02-0007 JAM DAD P

On April 28, 2011, petitioner filed a motion for the appointment of counsel and a
motion for permission to appeal. (Doc. Nos. 182 & 183.)

17

This action was closed on April 1, 2011. (Doc. Nos. 179 & 180.) On April 28,

18

2011, petitioner filed a notice of appeal. (Doc. No. 181.) Petitioner’s appeal to the Ninth Circuit

19

has already been processed by this court. (Doc. No. 186.) Petitioner’s recently filed motions will

20

therefore be denied as moot.

21

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

22

1. Petitioner’s April 28, 2011 request for appointment of counsel (Doc. No. 182)

23

is denied as moot;

24

2. Petitioner’s April 28, 2011 request for permission to appeal (Doc. No. 183) is

25

denied as moot; and

26

/////
1

1

3. Petitioner is advised that documents filed by petitioner since the closing date

2

will be disregarded and no orders will issue in response to future filings.

3

DATED: May 24, 2011.

4
5
6
7

DAD:6
moor0007.dd

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2