Turner v. Thomas et al

Filing 23

ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 9/10/2013 ORDERING that plaintiff's 21 Motion for Relief from judgment; and 22 Motion to Amend are DENIED. (Reader, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ANTHONY R. TURNER,

12
13
14

No. 2:10-cv-2369-MCE-EFB P

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER

R. THOMAS, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
17

Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42

18

U.S.C. § 1983. On July 9, 2012, the Court dismissed this action for plaintiff’s failure to prosecute

19

and failure to state a claim. ECF No. 19. Judgment was duly entered. ECF No. 20. Now, over

20

one year later, plaintiff seeks relief from judgment, and leave to amend. ECF Nos. 21, 22.

21

When a motion for relief from judgment is not filed within a year after judgment is

22

entered, the Court may only provide the requested relief if the party shows that the “judgment is

23

void,” has been “satisfied, released or discharged,” or “any other reason that justifies relief.” Fed.

24

R. Civ. P. 60(b)-(c). In addition, Local Rule 230(j) requires that a motion for reconsideration

25

state “what new or different facts or circumstances are claimed to exist which did not exist or

26

were not shown upon such prior motion, or what other grounds exist for the motion,” and “why

27

the facts or circumstances were not shown at the time of the prior motion.” E.D. Cal., Local Rule

28

230(j)(3)-(4).
1

1

Plaintiff’s motion fails to demonstrate that he is entitled to relief from judgment.

2

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s August 27, 2013 motion for

3

relief from judgment (ECF No. 21) and September 3, 2013 motion to amend (ECF No 22) are

4

DENIED.

5

Dated: September 10, 2013

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2