Moye v. Fidelity National Title Company

Filing 14

ORDER by Judge Joseph C. Spero Denying 9 Ex Parte Application ; Denying 10 Motion to Alter Judgment; Denying 12 Motion for pretrial conference (jcslc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/22/2009) (Additional attachment(s) added on 12/23/2009: # 1 Cert Serve) (klh, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 v. FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE CO., Defendant. ________________________________/ Plaintiff Malinka Tacuma Wade Moye filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis after having consented to the jurisdiction of a United States magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). On August 28, 2009, the Court granted the application to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissed the complaint with leave to amend. The Court ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint within thirty days. Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint and on October 14, 2009, the case was closed. Thereafter, Plaintiff filed what the court construes as a motion to reopen the case. See Docket Nos. 9, 10, 12 (Plaintiff's ex parte declaration for motion for reconsideration, motion to alter judgment and motion for pretrial conference). Liberally construed, Plaintiff has provided facts that would justify the failure to file a timely amended complaint; however, the Court finds nothing in the materials filed by Plaintiff that warrant reopening this case. Plaintiff again fails to state a legally cognizable claim. The motion to reopen the case is therefore DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: December 22, 2009 ______________________________ JOSEPH C. SPERO United States Magistrate Judge MALINKA TACUMA WADE MOYE, Plaintiff, No. C-09-3901 JCS ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REOPEN CASE [Docket Nos. 9, 10, 12] UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA United States District Court 11 For the Northern District of California 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1

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?