Wade v. Acosta

Filing 4

ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO FILE COMPLAINT AGAINST SECRETARY OF LABOR. Signed by Judge Alsup on 12/5/2017. (whalc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 12/5/2017)

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

No. C 17-80141 WHA
Plaintiff,

v.

13

ALEXANDER ACOSTA,

14

ORDER DENYING LEAVE TO
FILE COMPLAINT AGAINST
SECRETARY OF LABOR

Defendant.

15
16

/
On June 24, 2010, the undersigned judge ordered E. K. Wade to “seek leave from this

17

Court” before filing any additional complaints against the Department of Labor, any of its

18

employees, or against the United States or any other government official in connection with his

19

disputes with the DOL stemming from his prior employment in the Office of Federal Contract

20

Compliance Programs. Wade v. Gilliland, Case No. 10-00425 (Dkt. No. 100). Wade now seeks

21

to file a new complaint against the Secretary of Labor and other defendants unspecified in the

22

caption (although the allegations in the main text also encompass the DOL, OFCCP, and other

23

defendants covered by the 2010 pre-filing review order). The Court has reviewed the proposed

24

filings and finds them frivolous or duplicative of past rejected attempts. See, e.g., Wade v.

25

Chao, Case No. 17-80130; Wade v. Chao, Case No. 17-80094. Accordingly, the Clerk is

26

directed not to accept Wade’s proposed filings and shall please CLOSE THE FILE.

27
28

1

To be clear, “this Court,” as that phrase was used in the 2010 pre-filing review order, is

2

not limited to the undersigned judge. Any judge of this district may review Wade’s proposed

3

filings pursuant to that order.

4
5

IT IS SO ORDERED.

6
7

Dated: December 5, 2017.

WILLIAM ALSUP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8
9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2