Samad v. Adraktas, et al

Filing 26

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 11/16/2010 DENYING 25 application for writ of error coram nobis. The court notes that it will issue no response to future filings by plaintiff. (Zignago, K.)

(PC) Samad v. Adraktas, et al

Doc. 26

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 vs. STEPHANIE M. ADRAKTAS, et al., Defendants. / On March 26, 2010, the court dismissed this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Dckt. No. 16. Judgment was entered accordingly. Dckt. No. 17. On April 7, 2010, plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration pursuant to Rule 59 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on the ground that he should have been given leave to amend his complaint. Dckt. Nos. 18-19. On October 12, 2010, the assigned district judge denied plaintiff's motion for reconsideration. Dckt. No. 24. On October 29, 2010, plaintiff filed an "application for writ of error coram nobis." Dckt. No. 25. Plaintiff may not avail himself of a writ of coram nobis in this civil rights action. Coram nobis relief is available only to challenge federal convictions. See Yasui v. United States, 772 F.2d 1496, 1498 (9th Cir. 1985) ("the writ of error coram nobis fills a void in the availability of post-conviction remedies in federal criminal cases").
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ALAMIN SAMAD, Plaintiff, No. CIV S-09-2425 GEB EFB P

ORDER

Dockets.Justia.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Accordingly, plaintiff's application for writ of error coram nobis is denied. The court notes that it will issue no response to future filings by plaintiff in this action not authorized by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. So ordered. Dated: November 16, 2010.

2