Womack v. Baughman et al

Filing 23

ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 8/26/19 DENYING 12 Motion for Reconsideration. Plaintiff shall pay the appropriate filing fee within 21 days from the date of this order. (Kaminski, H)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RODNEY JEROME WOMACK,

12

No. 2:17-cv-02708-TLN-KJN

Plaintiff,

13

v.

ORDER

14

DAVID BAUGHMAN, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
On April 18, 2019, the magistrate judge issued an order requiring Plaintiff to submit,

17
18

within twenty-one days from the date of that order, the appropriate filing fee. (ECF No. 11.) On

19

May 9, 2019, Plaintiff signed a request for reconsideration of that order.1 (ECF No. 12.) On May

20

13, 2019, Plaintiff signed an amendment to his motion for reconsideration. (ECF No. 13.)
Local Rule 303(b) states “rulings by Magistrate Judges . . . shall be final if no

21
22

reconsideration thereof is sought from the Court within fourteen days . . . from the date of service

23

of the ruling on the parties.” Id. Therefore, Plaintiff’s requests for reconsideration of the

24

magistrate judge’s order of April 18, 2019, are untimely.

25

///

26

///

27

1

28

Under the “mailbox rule,” when a pro se prisoner gives prison authorities a pleading to mail to court, the
Court deems the pleading constructively filed on the date it was signed. Roberts v. Marshall, 627 F.3d 768, 770 n.1
(9th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted).

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

2

1. Plaintiff’s requests for reconsideration (ECF Nos. 12, 13) are denied; and

3

2. Plaintiff shall pay the appropriate filing fee within 21 days from the date of this order.

4

Date: August 26, 2019

5
6
7
8

Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge

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