Stephen v. Fox et al
Filing
10
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 2/6/2017 DENYING plaintiff's 9 motion to alter or amend the judgment; and this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. CASE CLOSED.(Yin, K)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
JIMMIE STEPHEN,
12
No. 2:16-cv-2574 CKD P
Plaintiff,
13
v.
14
R. W. FOX, et al.,
15
ORDER
Defendants.
16
On January 26, 2017, plaintiff, a Three Strikes litigant, was ordered to pay the filing fee
17
18
within fourteen days or face dismissal of this action. (ECF No. 7.) That period has now expired,
19
and plaintiff has filed what is effectively a motion for reconsideration of the January 26, 2017
20
order (ECF No. 9), but has not paid the filing fee.
21
A district court1 may reconsider a ruling under either Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
22
59(e) or 60(b). See Sch. Dist. Number. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255,
23
1262 (9th Cir. 1993). “Reconsideration is appropriate if the district court (1) is presented with
24
newly discovered evidence, (2) committed clear error or the initial decision was manifestly
25
unjust, or (3) if there is an intervening change in controlling law.” Id. at 1263. Here, the January
26
26, 2017 order was not clearly erroneous nor manifestly unjust, and none of the other factors
27
28
1
Plaintiff has consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction to conduct all proceedings in this action.
(ECF No. 4.)
1
1
apply. Because plaintiff has not paid the filing fee within the required time period, the court will
2
dismiss this action.
3
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
4
1. Plaintiff’s motion to alter or amend judgment (ECF No. 9) is denied; and
5
2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
6
Dated: February 16, 2017
_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
7
8
9
10
11
12
2 / step2574.fifp_order
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?