Sudberry v. Baca et al

Filing 13

ORDERED that petitioner's motion for clarification (ECF No. 12 ) is DENIED. Petitioner shall file no more documents in this closed case. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 2/17/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***

9

DENNIS K. SUDBERRY,

10

Case No. 3:14-cv-00662-RCJ-VPC
Petitioner,

ORDER

v.
11
ISIDRO BACA, et al.,
12
Respondents.
13
14
15

This court dismissed this pro se habeas corpus petition without prejudice for

16

failure to comply with this court’s order to pay the $5.00 filing fee (ECF No. 5), and

17

judgment was entered (ECF No. 7).

18
19
20

Now before the court is a filing that petitioner Sudberry styled a motion for
clarification and filed almost one year after this case was closed (ECF No. 12).
Moreover, Sudberry merely lists a few potential allegations that might implicate one’s

21
22

rights under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or 28 U.S.C. § 2254 and lists numerous cases that he

23

has filed in this court. He appears to ask the court to sort out which claims are raised in

24

which cases. Sudberry is responsible for litigating and keeping track of his many cases;

25

this motion is frivolous and a misuse of this court’s limited time and resources.

26
27
28
1

1
2
3

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for clarification (ECF No.
12) is DENIED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner shall file no more documents in this

4
closed case.
5
6
7
8

DATED: 17 February 2017.

9
ROBERT C. JONES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2