Hubbard v. Owens

Filing 7

ORDER denying 6 Motion for Reconsideration. Ordered by Judge Hugh Lawson on 3/31/2009. (nbp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION ANTHONY W. HUBBARD, Plaintiff, v. LINDEL OWENS, III, Defendant. : : : : : : : : : : : :

Criminal Action No. 5:08-CV-293-HL

ORDER
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has filed a Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 6) of the Court's September 16, 2008, Order (Doc. 3). In that Order, the Court granted Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis ("IFP") (Doc. 2). Because Plaintiff was proceeding IFP, the Court screened his Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). A review of his Complaint (Doc. 1) revealed that it was incoherent. As a result, the Court dismissed his Complaint without prejudice for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration is almost equally incoherent. The Motion mentions that a deputy clerk told Plaintiff to keep his evidence in his possession and not to file it. Plaintiff then requests that the case be reopened and that a jury determine "These matters of hand. Being Domestic or Foreign Terrorism." (Pla.'s
1

Mot. Reconsideration 1.) Plaintiff seems to be under the assumption that the Court dismissed his case for a lack of evidence; however, the Court never addressed the merits of his case. Instead, the Court dismissed his Complaint because it contains nothing more than unintelligible ramblings. Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration does not change this conclusion. The Motion is therefore denied. SO ORDERED, this the 31st day of March, 2009.

s/ Hugh Lawson HUGH LAWSON, Judge
dhc

2