Rodriguez v. City & County of San Francisco

Filing 19

ORDER by Judge Edward M. Chen Denying 17 Plaintiff's Request for Relief from Judgment. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate of Service). (emcsec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/4/2013)

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

DANIEL RODRIGUEZ,

9

Plaintiff,

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
11

v.
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISCO,

12
13

No. C-08-5257 MHP

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S
REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM
JUDGMENT
(Docket No. 17)

Defendant.
___________________________________/

14
15
16

Mr. Rodriguez, the pro se plaintiff in this case, has filed a motion for relief from judgment

17

under Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Mr. Rodriguez’s motion, however, fails to

18

provide any information about the judgment from which he seeks relief, or the grounds for his

19

request. His motion contains no content other than an unexplained citation to Title VI of the Civil

20

Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination by programs receiving federal funding. See 42

21

U.S.C. § 2000d. The only substantive order in this case, to which Mr. Rodriguez’s motion

22

presumably applies, denies his application to proceed in forma pauperis and dismisses his complaint

23

for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court, finding that Mr. Rodriguez had filed numerous

24

meritless complaints against similar parties based on similar allegations, also ordered his future

25

complaints to be subject to pre-filing review.

26

///

27

///

28

///

1
2

As Mr. Rodriguez fails to identify any facts or argument showing that he is entitled to relief
from judgment, his motion DENIED.

3
4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5
6

Dated: February 4, 2013

7

_________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge

8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

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

2