Gardner v. Coleman, et. al.

Filing 60

ORDER signed by Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr on 2/13/15 ORDERING that Plaintiff's Request to Reopen case 59 is DENIED. (Mena-Sanchez, L)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DENNIS GARDNER,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:12-cv-01981-GEB-CKD

v.

ORDER DENYING PLANITIFF’S
REQUEST TO REOPEN CASE

JOSHUA COLEMAN,

15

Defendant.

16
On November 26, 2014, an order was filed, which adopted

17
18

the

Magistrate

Judge’s

November

4,

2014

Findings

and

19

Recommendations in full and dismissed this action with prejudice.

20

Judgment was entered accordingly on the same day.

21

On February 5, 2015, Plaintiff filed a “request[] . . .

22

[to] reopen the case.” (ECF No. 59.) The Court construes this

23

filing as a motion for relief from judgment under Federal Rule of

24

Civil Procedure 60(b). See, e.g., Am. Ironworks & Erectors, Inc.

25

v. N. Am. Constr. Corp., 248 F.3d 892, 898-99 (9th Cir. 2001).

26

This Rule requires Plaintiff to “demonstrate mistake,

27

inadvertence,

surprise,

excusable

28

evidence, or any other basis for relief from judgment.” Ross v.
1

neglect,

newly

discovered

1

Tilton, 420 F. App’x 723, 724 (9th Cir. 2011) (citing Fed. R.

2

Civ. P. 60(b)).

3

60(b) relief, his request is denied.

4

Dated:

Since Plaintiff has not demonstrated a basis for

February 13, 2015

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2