Gonzales v. Bank of America Corporation et al

Filing 84

ORDER signed by Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 12/13/2011 ORDERING that Ms. Oliva's 73 motion to dismiss and for injunctive relief is DENIED. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

CARLOS GONZALES,

11

Plaintiff,

12
13
14
15

No. CIV S-10-2143 KJM-EFB

vs.
BANK OF AMERICA, et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER
/

16

The court is in receipt of pro se defendant Yeanina Oliva’s declaration, filed on

17

December 2, 2011. (ECF 73.) In this declaration, Ms. Oliva essentially contends that plaintiff

18

has brought his present suit in order to harass her and contends he has been harassing her in state

19

court proceedings. In general, the court construes pro se filings liberally, see Hebbe v. Pliler,

20

627 F.3d 338, 341 (9th Cir. 2010), and will accordingly analyze Ms. Oliva’s declaration as a

21

motion to dismiss and to enjoin plaintiff in the state court proceedings.

22

Insofar as Ms. Oliva’s declaration can be construed as a motion to dismiss the

23

present suit, it has been improperly noticed and will not be considered by the court. See Local

24

Rule 230; Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 54 (9th Cir. 1995) (“Although we construe pleadings

25

liberally in their favor, pro se litigants are bound by the rules of procedure.” (citing King v.

26

Atiyeh, 814 F.2d 565, 567 (9th Cir. 1987))). Insofar as the declaration can be construed as a
1

1

motion to enjoin plaintiff in the state court proceedings, this would not be an appropriate

2

exercise of federal jurisdiction.

3

Accordingly, Ms. Oliva’s motion to dismiss and for injunctive relief is denied.

4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5

DATED: December 13, 2011.

6
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2