Dunigan v. Hickman et al

Filing 144

ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 2/12/15 DENYING 143 Motion to Vacate Judgment. (Manzer, C)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

KEVIN DUNIGAN,

12

Petitioner,

13
14

No. 2:11-cv-961-MCE-EFB P

v.

ORDER

ROBERT HICKMAN,

15

Respondent.

16
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel on a petition for a writ of

17
18

habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On August 5, 2013, the undersigned

19

dismissed this action without prejudice and judgment was duly entered. ECF Nos. 102,

20

103. Petitioner now moves to vacate the judgment. ECF No. 143.
Reconsideration is appropriate if the court (1) is presented with newly discovered

21
22

evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly unjust, or (3) if

23

there is an intervening change in controlling law. Sch. Dist. No. 1J v. ACandS, Inc., 5

24

F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993). Additionally, Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil

25

Procedure provides as follows:

26

///

27

///

28

///
1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its
legal representative from a final judgment, order, or
proceeding for the following reasons: (1) mistake,
inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly
discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could
not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial
under rule 59(b); (3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic
or extrinsic), misrepresentation, or misconduct by an
opposing party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has
been satisfied, released or discharged; it is based on an
earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or
applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or (6) any
other reason that justifies relief.

9
10
11
12
13
14
15

Petitioner has not shown that circumstances exist to justify the requested relief.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s motion to vacate the judgment
(ECF No. 143) is denied. Petitioner is hereby reminded that the court will not respond to
future filings in this action that are not authorized by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
or the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
Dated: February 12, 2015

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2