Gimbel v. United States et al

Filing 27

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RECONSIDER by Hon. William Alsup denying 26 Motion for Reconsideration.(whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/20/2012) Modified on 8/20/2012 (whalc1, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9
JOHN GIMBEL,

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12

No. C 11-05503 WHA

Plaintiff,
v.

ORDER DENYING MOTION
TO RECONSIDER

13

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,

14

Defendants.
/

15
16

Pro se plaintiff recently filed a letter requesting “a full retake of events since last

17

scheduled appearance” (Dkt. No. 26). Although it is not entirely clear what plaintiff is

18

requesting in the letter, this order will construe it as a motion for reconsideration of a prior

19

dismissal order. This action was dismissed without prejudice for failure to serve and failure to

20

prosecute. Plaintiff’s letter offers only unpersuasive excuses for failing to serve and prosecute

21

this action. There is nothing in the letter to justify reconsideration of the dismissal order.

22

Therefore, plaintiff’s motion for reconsider is DENIED.

23
24

IT IS SO ORDERED.

25
26
27
28

Dated: August 20, 2012.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE