Shteynberg v. Sheriffs Department

Filing 13

ORDER Denying 10 Request to Expedite. Because this case is closed, there is nothing to expedite; accordingly, the Court DENIES Plaintiff's Request. The Court will accept no further filings in this closed matter. Signed by Judge Janis L. Sammartino on 6/29/2022. (All non-registered users served via U.S. Mail Service) (tcf)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RUDOLF SHTEYNBERG,

Case No.: 17-CV-2149 JLS (KSC)
Plaintiff,

12
13

v.

14

SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT,

ORDER DENYING REQUEST TO
EXPEDITE
(ECF No. 10)

Defendant.

15
16
17

Presently before the Court is Plaintiff Rudolf Shteynberg’s Request to Reorgonise

18

[sic] / Simplify the Process (“Req.,” ECF No. 10), which Plaintiff also characterizes as “a

19

Request to Expedite the Process!”, see id. at 1. However, as the Court noted in its

20

November 1, 2021 Notice of Document Discrepancy rejecting Plaintiff’s October 22, 2021

21

“Appointment of Counsel,” this case was dismissed and the action closed more than four

22

years ago, in February 2018, for failure to prosecute. See generally ECF No. 9 (citing ECF

23

No. 8). Because this case is closed, there is nothing to expedite; accordingly, the Court

24

DENIES Plaintiff’s Request. The Court will accept no further filings in this closed matter.

25
26

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 29, 2022

27
28
1
17-CV-2149 JLS (KSC)