Campbell v. Struffert et al

Filing 120

ORDER by Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. DENYING 119 MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT. (Attachments: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service)(ndrS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/8/2017)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 SENARBLE CAMPBELL, Plaintiff, 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 Case No. 13-cv-05084-HSG (PR) ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT v. W. STRUFFERT, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 119 Defendants. 12 13 Plaintiff Senarble Campbell, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a motion for 14 relief from the judgment entered in this court on March 22, 2016 granting defendants’ motion for 15 summary judgment. See Docket Nos. 117 & 118. The motion is filed pursuant to Federal Rule of 16 Civil Procedure 60(b). 17 Rule 60(b) lists six grounds for relief from a judgment. Such a motion must be made 18 within a “reasonable time,” and as to grounds for relief (1) - (3), no later than one year after the 19 judgment was entered. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b)-(c). Rule 60(b) provides for reconsideration 20 where one or more of the following is shown: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable 21 neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered 22 before the court's decision; (3) fraud by the adverse party; (4) the judgment is void; (5) the 23 judgment has been satisfied; or (6) any other reason justifying relief. Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b); School 24 Dist. 1J v. ACandS Inc., 5 F.3d 1255, 1263 (9th Cir. 1993). 25 Plaintiff does not indicate under what provision of Rule 60(b) reconsideration is warranted. 26 But because plaintiff essentially argues that the Court should not have accepted defendants’ 27 testimony, his motion best fits under Rule 60(b)(1), which provides for relief from judgment on 28 the grounds of mistake. The motion must be denied for two reasons. First, plaintiff did not file 1 the motion within one year from the date judgment was entered. Second, plaintiff’s motion fails 2 to make the showing required under Rule 60(b) or otherwise to show good cause for 3 reconsideration. In short, plaintiff disagrees with the Court’s ruling, and merely repeats arguments 4 which the Court has already considered and rejected. Rule 60(b) should not be used as a substitute 5 for appeal or a means of attacking some perceived error of the court. See Twentieth Century - Fox 6 Film Corp. v. Dunnahoo, 637 F.2d 1338, 1341 (9th Cir. 1981). Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion for 7 relied from judgment is DENIED. 8 No further filings will be accepted in this closed case. 9 This order terminates Docket No. 119. 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 5/8/2017 12 13 HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. United States District Judge 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

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?