Bruzzone v. Intel Corporation et al

Filing 128

ORDER by Judge Hamilton denying 123 Motion for "Case Oversight Review". (pjhlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/31/2017)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 4 MICHAEL A. BRUZZONE, 6 7 Case No. 14-cv-1279-WHA Plaintiff, 5 v. ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR "CASE OVERSIGHT REVIEW" INTEL CORPORATION, et al., Defendants. 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 Plaintiff Michael A. Bruzzone filed a motion requesting the undersigned District 12 Judge to “reverse, strike, set aside” orders issued by the District Judge assigned to the 13 above-entitled action, and to “reverse” the order dismissing Case No. 16-mc-80233 WHA 14 pursuant to the prefiling order issued in this action on August 19, 2014. The motion is 15 DENIED. 16 There is no provision in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Civil Local 17 Rules that would permit one District Judge of this court to “reverse” an order issued by 18 another District Judge. In particular, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(d)(3), which 19 plaintiff has cited in his motion, does not authorize a litigant to seek such relief. 20 Moreover, the court notes that plaintiff appealed the June 28, 2014 dismissal of this case 21 and the final judgment, which was affirmed by the Ninth Circuit on November 28, 2016. 22 See Bruzzone v. Intel Corp.¸ 670 Fed. Appx. 931 (9th Cir. Nov. 21, 2017). 23 The undersigned will not consider any further motions or requests relating to this 24 case or any other case filed by this plaintiff. 25 IT IS SO ORDERED. 26 Dated: May 31, 2017 27 28 __________________________________ PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON United States District Judge

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?