Mitchell v. California Department of Corrections et al

Filing 69

ORDER by Judge James Donato denying 67 Motion for Reconsideration.(lrcS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/17/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 DARRELL MITCHELL, Plaintiff, 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 Case No. 13-cv-03765-JD v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM FINAL JUDGMENT Re: Dkt. No. 67 Defendants. 12 13 This is a civil rights case filed pro se by a state prisoner. The Court granted a motion for summary judgment for one defendant and granted a motion to dismiss but provided plaintiff leave 14 to amend with respect to another defendant. Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint, but the 15 Court dismissed that complaint and closed the case. Plaintiff has now filed a motion for relief 16 from final judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). 17 18 19 Rule 60(b) lists six grounds for relief from a judgment. Such a motion must be made within a “reasonable time,” and as to grounds for relief (1) - (3), no later than one year after the judgment was entered. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). Rule 60(b) provides for reconsideration where one or more of the following is shown: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect; 20 21 (2) newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered before the court's decision; (3) fraud by the adverse party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the judgment has 22 been satisfied; (6) any other reason justifying relief. Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b); School Dist. 1J v. 23 ACandS Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993). Rule 60(b) provides a mechanism for parties to 24 seek relief from a judgment when “it is no longer equitable that the judgment should have 25 26 prospective application,” or when there is any other reason justifying relief from judgment. Jeff D. v. Kempthorne, 365 F.3d 844, 853-54 (9th Cir. 2004) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)). Plaintiff filed this case in August 2013, while incarcerated at Mule Creek State Prison 27 (“MCSP”). The case concerned medical treatment while plaintiff was incarcerated at San Quentin 28 State Prison and Lake County Jail from 2008 to 2011, and referrals and treatment at the University 1 2 of California San Francisco. In this motion, plaintiff contends the Court did not consider evidence about plaintiff’s medical treatment at MCSP when he was transferred there in April 2012. Plaintiff’s motion is denied. Plaintiff has not shown that the treatment he received at 3 MCSP starting in 2012 is relevant to this action. None of the defendants in this action were 4 employed at MCSP and the subject matter of the case concerned events prior to plaintiff’s transfer 5 to that prison. The Court denied plaintiff’s request to expand the record because the new 6 allegations occurred at a different prison in a different district. Docket No. 65 at 5. Plaintiff also 7 argues that he filed this action while at San Quentin State Prison, and was transferred to MCSP after this case was being litigated; therefore, the Court should reconsider the prior order. Plaintiff 8 9 is mistaken. He filed his original complaint while at MCSP and only presented allegations against the defendants at San Quentin State Prison and he has not described why this new evidence could not have been presented sooner. Docket No. 1. Regardless, plaintiff has still failed to demonstrate 11 United States District Court Northern District of California 10 how medical care at MCSP was relevant to the medical care provided by defendants in this action. 12 Because plaintiff has not shown that he is entitled to relief pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b), this 13 14 motion (Docket No. 67) is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: March 17, 2016 15 16 17 JAMES DONATO 18 United States District Judge 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 DARRELL MITCHELL, Case No. 13-cv-03765-JD Plaintiff, 5 v. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 6 7 8 9 10 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., Defendants. I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 That on March 17, 2016, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle located in the Clerk's office. 16 17 18 Darrell Mitchell ID: CDCR# K-48636 Mule Creek State Prison B-9-220U P.O. Box 409040 Ione, CA 95640 19 20 21 Dated: March 17, 2016 22 23 Susan Y. Soong Clerk, United States District Court 24 25 26 27 By:________________________ LISA R. CLARK, Deputy Clerk to the Honorable JAMES DONATO 28 3

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?