DuRoss v. California State Prison et al

Filing 34

ORDER signed by District Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr. on 10/5/2017 ORDERING that plaintiff's 32 motion to vacate the judgment is DENIED and his 31 amended complaint is DISREGARDED. Plaintiff is further informed that the court will not respond to future filings in this action. (Zignago, K.)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MARK ANTHONY DUROSS, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:15-cv-1872-GEB-EFB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER CALIFORNIA STATE PRISON, et al., Defendants. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On June 14, 2017, the court dismissed this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A and judgment was duly entered. ECF Nos. 26, 27. Plaintiff now moves to vacate the judgment. ECF No. 32. He has also filed an amended complaint. ECF No. 31. Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides for reconsideration of a final judgment where one or more of the following is shown: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence which, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered within twenty-eight days of entry of judgment; (3) fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct of an opposing party; (4) voiding of the judgment; (5) satisfaction of the judgment; and (6) any other reason justifying relief. Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). A motion for reconsideration on any of these grounds must be brought within a reasonable time, and no later than one year, of the entry of the judgment or the order being challenged. Id. Additionally, Local Rule 230(j) requires 1 1 a party filing a motion for reconsideration to show the “new or different facts or circumstances 2 claimed to exist which did not exist or were not shown upon such prior motion, or what other 3 grounds exist for the motion.” E.D. Cal. Local Rule 230(j). 4 Here, plaintiff appears to disagree with the court’s disposition of his case and its 5 imposition of a filing fee. He has not, however, shown that he satisfies any of the grounds for 6 relief provided by Rule 60(b). 7 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to vacate the judgment 8 (ECF No. 32) is denied and his amended complaint (ECF No. 31) is disregarded. Plaintiff is 9 further informed that the court will not respond to future filings in this action that are not 10 11 authorized by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. Dated: October 5, 2017 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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?