Ashanti v. Tilton
Filing
84
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 10/13/11 ordering that in response to petitioner's request for status filed pro se on 10/07/11 the clerk of the Court is to serve this order on both plaintiff's counsel and, on this occasion, on plaintiff pro se, plaintiff pro se to be served at the address included on the filing at docket number 83 . No further communication should be directed to this court by plaintiff pro se in this matter. (Plummer, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
ASKIA S. ASHANTI,
11
12
13
Plaintiff,
No. CIV S-07-0807 MCE GGH P
vs.
JAMES E. TILTON,
14
Defendant.
15
ORDER
/
16
This action was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice, pursuant to a stipulation.
17
Plaintiff’s subsequent Rule 60(b) motion for relief from judgment/motion for withdrawal from
18
voluntary dismissal was denied.1 Although plaintiff filed the motion pro se, plaintiff’s counsel
19
still appeared as counsel of record, according to the court’s docket, and both the findings and
20
recommendations recommending denial and the order granting denial of plaintiff’s 60(b) motion
21
were served on his counsel. Plaintiff is free to contact his counsel regarding the rulings.
22
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, in response to petitioner’s request for status,
23
filed pro se on October 7, 2011, the Clerk of the Court is to serve this order on both plaintiff’s
24
counsel and, on this occasion, on plaintiff pro se, plaintiff pro se to be served at the address
25
1
26
The court determined that plaintiff had provided no basis for the court’s continuing
jurisdiction in this matter.
1
1
included on the filing at docket # 83. No further communication should be directed to this court
2
by plaintiff pro se in this matter.
3
DATED: October 13, 2011
4
5
/s/ Gregory G. Hollows
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
GGH:009
asha0807.rsp
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
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?