Calip v. Oakland Unified School District et al

Filing 58

ORDER CONSTRUING REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION AS MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO FRCP 60(B); GRANTING MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT; DISMISSING CASE FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM; RESETTING TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL. Finally, plain tiff is hereby instructed that, aside from the filing of an appeal, no further filings shall be accepted in this action. This case is closed. Signed by Judge Susan Illston on 5/23/16. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(tfS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/23/2016)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 TAJAI CALIP, Case No. 15-cv-00877-SI Plaintiff, 8 v. 9 10 OAKLAND UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, Defendant. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 ORDER CONSTRUING REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION AS MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO FRCP 60(B); GRANTING MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT; DISMISSING CASE FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM; RESETTING TIME TO FILE NOTICE OF APPEAL 13 14 15 On November 17, 2015, the Court dismissed this case without prejudice and entered 16 judgment. The Court's November 17, 2015 order stated that plaintiff had failed to file a third 17 amended complaint by the deadline of November 13, 2015, and thus that the case was dismissed 18 for failure to prosecute. The Court also found that various documents filed by plaintiff on 19 November 6 and 12, 2015 could not be construed, individually or collectively, as an amended 20 complaint. 21 The docket reflects that on December 1, 2015, the November 17, 2015 order and judgment 22 mailed to plaintiff's address of record was returned to the Court as undeliverable. Dkt. 54.1 That 23 same day, the November 17, 2015 order and judgment were re-mailed to a different address for 24 plaintiff. Plaintiff did not file a notice of appeal. 25 Instead, plaintiff filed a document on December 3, 2015 titled both "Amended Complaint" 26 27 28 1 According to the docket, plaintiff called the Court's clerk on November 16, 2015 to update her address, and the November 17, 2015 order and judgment were mailed to the address provided on November 16, 2015. 1 and "Plaintiff Oakland Unified School District Opposing Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice 2 of Motion to Dismiss Initial Complaint." Dkt. 53.2 Plaintiff also filed letters dated April 27, 2016 3 and May 18, 2016. The May 18, 2016 letter states that plaintiff is "asking for a reconsideration 4 and court order judgment for my compensation in the case of Calip v. OUSD. It was sent late 5 because I received the information late and had to mail it off to the courts." Dkt. 57. 6 In light of plaintiff's pro se status, and the fact that the November 17, 2015 order and 7 judgment was initially returned as undeliverable, the Court construes plaintiff's May 18, 2016 8 letter requesting reconsideration as a motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of 9 Civil Procedure 60(b). So construed, the Court GRANTS plaintiff relief from the judgment and 10 sets aside the November 17, 2015 order and judgment. United States District Court Northern District of California 11 The Court will evaluate whether the documents filed on November 30, 2015 and December 12 3, 2015, state a claim for relief. The Court concludes that they do not. Neither document alleges 13 any causes of action, and instead plaintiff simply reiterates arguments she made previously in 14 opposition to defendant's earlier motions to dismiss the complaint. See generally Dkt. Nos. 53 & 15 55. 16 opportunity to file an amended complaint, and provided plaintiff with specific guidance regarding 17 the filing of an amended complaint. See Dkt. 47 at 6:22-7:8. Plaintiff's November 30, 2015 and 18 December 3, 2015 filings do not comply with the Court's November 2, 2015 order, and the Court 19 concludes that plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. 20 The Court's November 2, 2015 order stated that plaintiff would be provided one final Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this case for failure to state a claim. The Court will 21 enter a new judgment. Plaintiff is advised that pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate 22 Procedure 4(a)(1), if plaintiff wishes to file a notice of appeal, the notice of appeal "must be 23 filed with the district court within 30 days after entry of judgment or order appealed from." 24 The Court also advises plaintiff that the Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 that 25 any appeal in this action is not taken in good faith, and thus if plaintiff wishes to file a notice of 26 27 28 2 That document is similar to a document filed on November 30, 2015, also titled "Amended Complaint" and "Plaintiff Oakland Unified School District Opposing Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice of Motion to Dismiss Initial Complaint." 2 1 2 3 appeal, plaintiff must also pay the filing fee for an appeal. Finally, plaintiff is hereby instructed that, aside from the filing of an appeal, no further filings shall be accepted in this action. This case is closed. 4 5 IT IS SO ORDERED. 6 7 8 23 Dated: May ____, 2016 ______________________________________ SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 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?