Hicks v. Arya
Filing
97
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 02/27/19 DENYING 95 Motion for Reconsideration. (Plummer, M)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
MICHAEL J. HICKS,
12
13
14
15
No. 2: 16-cv-2465 TLN KJN P
Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
AFSHIN ARYA, et al.,
Defendants.
16
17
Plaintiff is a state prisoner, proceeding without counsel, with a civil rights action pursuant
18
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On February 19, 2019, plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of the
19
undersigned’s February 7, 2019 order granting plaintiff’s January 7, 2019 motion for copies. The
20
motion for reconsideration is addressed to the undersigned. For the reasons stated herein, the
21
motion for reconsideration is denied.
22
In the February 7, 2019 order, the undersigned stated that plaintiff alleged that on
23
December 24, 2018, his legal property was destroyed after prison officials shot water in his cell
24
with a fire hose. The undersigned directed the Clerk of the Court to send plaintiff a copy of his
25
proposed third amended complaint and a copy of the docket sheet in this action. The undersigned
26
directed plaintiff to mark any documents he believed he required to litigate this action on the
27
docket sheet and return the docket sheet to the court. The undersigned further observed that it did
28
not appear that plaintiff required access to many of the documents filed before the third amended
1
1
2
complaint to prosecute this action.
In the motion for reconsideration, plaintiff alleges that the undersigned incorrectly
3
described the circumstances of the destruction of his property in the February 9, 2019 order.
4
Plaintiff alleges that at no time was water shot inside of his cell that resulted in the destruction of
5
his property. Plaintiff alleges that prison officials destroyed his property.
6
In the motion for reconsideration, plaintiff states that the undersigned correctly found that
7
many of the documents filed before the third amended complaint are not necessary for the
8
prosecution of this action. Plaintiff also states that he will be able to obtain many of the missing
9
documents through discovery. Plaintiff requests that the undersigned stay the order directing
10
plaintiff to submit the docket sheet identifying the missing documents until the completion of
11
discovery.
12
Staying the February 7, 2019 order directing plaintiff to submit the docket sheet
13
identifying the missing documents until the close of discovery is not practical. Accordingly, the
14
motion for reconsideration is denied.
15
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (ECF
16
No. 95) is denied.
17
Dated: February 27, 2019
18
19
20
21
Hicks2465.rec
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?