Hsu v. UBS Financial Services, Inc.

Filing 72

ORDER DENYING 70 MOTION TO INTRODUCE NEW EVIDENCE.(whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/1/2014).

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

DARRU “KEN” HSU, individually and as
a trustee of the DARRU K. HSU AND
GINA T. HSU LIVING TRUST, and on
behalf of all others similarly situated,

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

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO
INTRODUCE NEW EVIDENCE

Plaintiff,

13

No. C 11-02076 WHA

v.
UBS FINANICIAL SERVICES, INC.,
Defendant.

/

This action brought by pro se plaintiff Darru “Ken” Hsu was dismissed and closed long
ago in 2011. The dismissal was then affirmed by our court of appeals in 2013, with Hsu’s
petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court denied thereafter.
Nevertheless, Hsu then filed two more motions with the undersigned judge: (1) a Rule
60(b)(6) and (d)(3) motion, and (2) a motion to enter default judgment against defendant UBS
Financial Services, Inc. An order dated March 6, 2014, denied both motions (Dkt. No. 69). On
March 26, 2014, Hsu filed another motion to “amend and correct” the March 6 order, later that
day filing a notice of appeal on the March 6 order (Dkt. Nos. 70, 71).
The essence of Hsu’s latest motion is as follows. He seeks to introduce “newly
discovered evidence” for the March 6 order, including a 2010 Form ADV Disclosure Brochure
and documents from his prior FINRA arbitration. According to Hsu, “[t]he foregoing evidence
supports [his] [Rule] 60(b) Motion under which [his] due diligence in appeals tolled the time

1

limit within a year for any sub-sections of Rule 60(b); or meets the elements for new trial” (Dkt.

2

No. 70 at 4).

3

Hsu’s motion is DENIED. The March 6 order has already decided the Rule 60(b) motion,

4

and Hsu’s “newly discovered evidence” does not change that decision. In effect, Hsu seeks a

5

reconsideration of the March 6 order, but even so, such relief is unavailable to him under our

6

local rules. This is because Hsu must first seek leave of the undersigned judge before filing a

7

motion for reconsideration. See Civ. L.R. 7-9(a).

8
9

IT IS SO ORDERED.

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
Dated: April 1, 2014.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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