Govind v. Felker et al

Filing 51

ORDER signed by District Judge Otis D. Wright, II on 7/8/2011 DENYING plaintiff's Motion for Stay as MOOT. This case remains DISMISSED and the matter is CLOSED. (Marciel, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DANIEL H. GOVIND,

)

12

Plaintiff,

)

13

vs.

No. 2:06-CV-02467 ODW
Consolidated with 2: 08-CV-1183-ODW

)

14

)

15

WARDEN FELKER, D. L. RUNNELS,

)

16

and M. MCDONALD,

ORDER

)

17
18

Defendants

)

____________________________________ )

19
20

Plaintiff Daniel H. Govind requests a stay of this action because he “is not in good health and

21

has a heavy burden on his shoulder (sic) attending school and preparing for his examine. (sic)” (See

22

document number 74, filed July 5, 2011.) Apparently Plaintiff has failed to note, or fails to

23

appreciate the import of the Dismissal of this Action [73] entered June 27, 2011.

24

Even if the court were to construe Plaintiff’s most recent filing as a request for

25

reconsideration, which it clearly is not, that motion would be denied. The primary basis for the

26

dismissal was Plaintiff’s refusal, following repeated admonitions, to cooperate with discovery. Even

27

now, Plaintiff continues to justify his refusal to cooperate with discovery by stating that “[h]e also

28

informed the court and Williams and Associates that he will not take part in Deposition or Answer

1

any questions, because everything has been said in petitions (sic) civil rights claim.” (Motion For

2

Stay Until December 2011 Without Prejudice to Either Party ” page 1, [74].

3

It is clear to the court that Plaintiff intends to maintain the stance which resulted in this case

4

being dismissed in the first place, therefore there are no grounds for the court to reconsider its initial

5

dismissal for refusal to participate in discovery.

6

Plaintiff is instructed that this matter is now closed and he is to make no further filings in this

7

case. He is free at this point to seek review of this dismissal by filing an appeal to the Ninth Circuit

8

Court of Appeals. Plaintiff’s attention is directed to Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 4

9

which provides in part:

10

“In a civil case, except as provided in Rules . . . 4(c), the notice of appeal required by

11

Rule 3 must be filed with the district clerk within 30 days after the judgment or order

12

appealed from is entered.”

13

Rule 4(c) provides:

14

“If an inmate confined in an institution files a notice of appeal in either a civil or criminal

15

case, the notice is timely if it is deposited in the institution’s internal mail system on or

16

before the last day for filing. If an institution has a system designed for legal mail, the

17

inmate must use that system to receive the benefit of this rule.”

18
19
20

The request for stay is DENIED as moot. This case is and remains dismissed and the matter
closed.

21
22
23
24

DATED:

July 8, 2011

______________________________
OTIS D. WRIGHT, II, DISTRICT JUDGE

25
26
27
28

2.