Campbell v. The State of California

Filing 6

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/23/10 ORDERING that this case is CLOSED. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

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. THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA; DEFENDANT STATE AGENT LEON, Defendants. / ORDER IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA LARRY W. CAMPBELL, Plaintiff, No. Misc. S-10-004 GEB EFB PS

This miscellaneous case, in which plaintiff is proceeding in propria persona, was referred to the undersigned under Local Rule 302(c)(21), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Pending before the undersigned are two documents entitled plaintiff's "Pre Filing Request to Provide [Plaintiff] a Free Attorney," Dckt. Nos. 1, 2; a document entitled "Pre Filing Request More News Facts," Dckt. No. 3; a document purporting to provide notice to "Justice Scotty Scotland," Dckt. No. 4; and a document entitled "Pre Filing Request Pursuant to Federal Judge Made Law," Dckt. No. 5. Plaintiff's filings are incomprehensible. It is unclear what precise relief he seeks and the basis for that relief. Although the caption of two of the documents state that they are requests for counsel, it appears that in December 2004, United States District Judge Damrell issued an order declaring plaintiff a vexatious litigant and setting forth specific pre-filing orders relating to 1

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

plaintiff. See Campbell v. DeAmicus, No. CIV S-04-1244 FCD JFM PS, Dckt. No. 51. Specifically, the pre-filing orders provide, inter alia, that "[p]laintiff is prohibited from raising in this court any civil rights claims relating to his family law proceedings, . . . and any vexatious litigant order entered in state court proceedings," and that "[p]laintiff is directed to submit a prefiling request to the duty judge of this court to consider any new federal claims unrelated to plaintiff's family law dispute and/or the state court's vexatious litigant orders." Id. The prefiling orders direct plaintiff "to include with any pre-filing request a declaration under penalty of perjury stating that the claims raised in his pre-filing request are unrelated to his family law dispute or the state court's vexatious litigant orders," and state that "[p]laintiff is required to obtain a court order granting him permission to proceed with such unrelated claims prior to filing such claims in this court." Id. To the extent plaintiff's filings purport to be pre-filing requests in conformance with the December 2004 pre-filing orders, they are denied. Plaintiff has not stated in any of his filings "any new federal claims unrelated to plaintiff's family law dispute and/or the state court's vexatious litigant orders" and plaintiff has not included in any of his filings "a declaration under penalty of perjury stating that the claims raised in his pre-filing request are unrelated to his family law dispute or the state court's vexatious litigant orders." Additionally, to the extent plaintiff's filings are intended to be a request for counsel, such request is also denied. Because plaintiff does not have a pending complaint in this action, he is not entitled to counsel. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. DATED: June 23, 2010.

2