Wade v. Chao

Filing 11

ORDER RE PRE-FILING REVIEW OF COMPLAINT re 10 Received Document filed by E. K. Wade, 4 Received Document filed by E. K. Wade Signed by Judge Alsup on 9/18/2017. (whalc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 9/18/2017) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/18/2017: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (tlS, COURT STAFF).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 E. K. WADE, 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 13 Plaintiff, No. C 17-80094 WHA v. ELAINE CHAO et al., 14 ORDER RE PRE-FILING REVIEW OF COMPLAINT Defendants. / 15 16 The Court has reviewed plaintiff E.K. Wade’s new complaint (filed twice) in Wade v. 17 Chao, et al., No. 3:17-mc-80094-WHA (Dkt. Nos. 4, 10), and finds its contents are frivolous 18 and repetitive of past filings in plaintiff’s prolonged series of lawsuits against Elaine Chao (the 19 former Secretary of Labor), and the United States Department of Labor. Accordingly, 20 pursuant to the pre-filing review order issued on June 24, 2010, in Wade v. Gilliland, et al., 21 No. 3:10-cv-00425-WHA (Dkt. No. 100), the Clerk is directed not to accept the new complaint 22 for filing. Plaintiff’s concurrent motions for leave to file a fifth amended complaint, and motion 23 to amend fifth amended complaint are DENIED AS MOOT. The Clerk shall please CLOSE THE 24 FILE. 25 26 IT IS SO ORDERED. 27 28 Dated: September 18, 2017. WILLIAM ALSUP 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?