MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS of the Honorable Judge Edward C. Reed, Jr, on 9/15/2010. IT IS ORDERED that P's 111 motion is DENIED. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - PM)
USA v. Wilson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA RENO, NEVADA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) DALTON WILSON, ) ) Defendant. ) ___________________________________) PRESENT: Deputy Clerk: EDWARD C. REED, JR. COLLEEN LARSEN Reporter: 3:09-CV-166-ECR-RAM MINUTES OF THE COURT DATE: September 15, 2010
U. S. DISTRICT JUDGE NONE APPEARING
Counsel for Plaintiff(s) Counsel for Defendant(s) MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS
NONE APPEARING NONE APPEARING
Plaintiff has filed a document entitled "Fourth Petition to Vacate a Void Order for Lack of a Final Judgment and Direct Attack for Fraud Upon the Court, Want of In Personam, Subject Matter and Territorial Jurisdiction" (#111). This document, as its title suggests, repeats arguments previously rejected by the Court, and will be rejected again on the same basis. Plaintiff is cautioned that his repeated filing of documents repeating frivolous arguments previously rejected by the Court constitutes, among other things, a violation of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court's tolerance of Plaintiff's inappropriate filings is nearing an end. Plaintiff is hereby warned that continued frivolous filings may result in sanctions being imposed on him, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 and the inherent authority of the Court. Such sanctions may include, but are not limited to, monetary sanctions and a declaration that Plaintiff is a vexatious litigant, with the attendant consequences. IT IS, THEREFORE, HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's "Fourth Petition to Vacate a Void Order for Lack of a Final Judgment and Direct Attack for Fraud Upon the Court, Want of In Personam, Subject Matter and Territorial Jurisdiction" (#111) is DENIED. LANCE S. WILSON, CLERK By /s/ Deputy Clerk
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?