M'wanza v. Byrna et al

Filing 21

ORDER - The Ninth Circuit's mandate now having issued (ECF No. 19 ), the Court vacates the portion of its prior order denying Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 13 at 1-2). Per the Ninth Circuit's Order (ECF No. 18 at 2), the Court will evaluate Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 12 ) using the four-factor test for excusable neglect outlined in Pioneer Investment Services Co. v. Brunswick Associates Ltd. Partnership, 507 U.S. 380, 395 (1993) in a separate, forthcoming order. Signed by Chief Judge Miranda M. Du on 7/2/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - AB)

1
2
3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

4

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

5

***

6

TACUMA J. M’WANZA,

7
8
9

Case No. 3:16-cv-00590-MMD-WGC
Plaintiff,

ORDER

v.
Q. BYRNA et al.,
Defendants.

10
11

This action is a pro se civil rights complaint filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by a

12

former state prisoner, who appears to be incarcerated again. (ECF Nos. 1-1, 11, 12.) On

13

June 9, 2020, the Ninth Circuit vacated the Court’s order denying Plaintiff’s motion for

14

reconsideration seeking to reopen his case. (ECF No. 18.) The Ninth Circuit’s mandate

15

now having issued (ECF No. 19), the Court vacates the portion of its prior order denying

16

Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 13 at 1-2). Per the Ninth Circuit’s order

17

(ECF No. 18 at 2), the Court will evaluate Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (ECF No.

18

12) using the four-factor test for excusable neglect outlined in Pioneer Investment

19

Services Co. v. Brunswick Associates Ltd. Partnership, 507 U.S. 380, 395 (1993) in a

20

separate, forthcoming order.

21

DATED THIS 2nd day of July 2020.

22
23
24
25
26
27
28

MIRANDA M. DU
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE