Foy v. Vallejo Police Department
Filing
133
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 4/20/2017 DENYING plaintiff's 132 motion to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff is advised that any additional documents filed in this case will be disregarded and no order will issue in response to future filings. (Yin, K)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
ALFRED JAMES FOY,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
No. 2:11-cv-3262-MCE-CMK-P
vs.
ORDER
VALLEJO POLICE DEPARTMENT,
15
Defendant.
16
/
17
Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42
18
U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff’s motion to file an amended complaint (Doc.
19
132).
20
Plaintiff is informed that this case is closed. This case was set for jury trial on
21
January 23, 2017. On day one of those proceedings, plaintiff moved to continue the trial, which
22
was denied. Plaintiff then moved to dismiss his case, which was granted by the court with no
23
objection from the defense. Judgment was entered on February 22, 2017. Plaintiff is now
24
attempting to reopen this closed case by way of amending his complaint. Such proceedings are
25
not authorized. As such, his motion to file an amended complaint will be denied. Plaintiff is
26
advised that any additional documents filed in this case will be disregarded and no order will
1
1
2
3
issue in response to future filings.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to file an
amended complaint (Doc. 132) is denied.
4
5
6
7
DATED: April 20, 2017
______________________________________
CRAIG M. KELLISON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?