Rodriguez v. Lungren, et al

Filing 29

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 4/9/2012)

1
2
3
4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

ALVARO C. RODRIGUEZ,

8
9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12

No. C 07-4126 SI

Plaintiff,

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

v.
THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
Defendant.

/

This case has been closed since January, 2008. On January 14, 2008, the Court issued an Order

13
Granting Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss plaintiff’s complaint, without leave to amend. Dkt. 19. The
14
Court held that plaintiff’s complaint is barred, as he cannot attempt to invalidate his state court
15
convictions through this Section 1983 action. Id. (citing Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486 (1994)).
16
The Court also directed plaintiff “not to file any further federal cases regarding his 1993 state court
17
convictions because these actions are without legal merit.” Id. On May 1, 2009, the Ninth Circuit Court
18
of Appeals affirmed the Court’s January 14, 2008 Order. Dkt. 25.
19
On April 2, 2012, plaintiff filed a letter with the Court in this closed case entitled “Notice to the
20
Court: All judgments rendered are Void Ab initio.” Dkt. 29. To the extent plaintiff’s letter is a motion
21
for reconsideration, the motion is DENIED. Plaintiff is again directed to cease filing motions in this
22
case regarding his 1993 state court convictions.
23
24
IT IS SO ORDERED.
25
Dated: April 9, 2012
26
27
28

SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge