Allah v. Haggerty et al

Filing 16

ORDER DENYING 15 MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT. File remains CLOSED. Signed by Chief Judge Stanley A Bastian. (SG, Case Administrator)**2 PAGE(S), PRINT ALL**(Allah, Prisoner ID: 950376)

Case 4:19-cv-05279-SAB

ECF No. 16

filed 03/06/25

PageID.313

Page 1 of 2

1
2
3

FILED IN THE
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

4

Mar 06, 2025

5

SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK

6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

8
9
10 ALLAH@

No. 4:19-CV-05279-SAB
Petitioner,

11

ORDER DENYING MOTION

v.

12

13 ANCER L. HAGGERTY and DONALD

FOR RELIEF FROM

14 R. HOLBROOK

JUDGMENT

Respondents.

15
16
17

Before the Court is Petitioner’s Motion for Relief from Judgment and Order

18 F.R.C.P. Rule 60(b)(2) Newly Discovered Evidence; (3) Fraud; (4) Void
19 Judgment; (6) Any Other Reason Justifying Relief from Operation of Judgment,
20 ECF No. 15. Petitioner is pro se. Respondents have not been served.
21

On April 20, 2020, Petitioner’s appeal to the Ninth Circuit in this matter was

22 dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. On April 28, 2020, this Court dismissed this
23 matter without prejudice for Petitioner’s failure to comply with Habeas Rule
24 3(a)(2) related to filing his fee and informa pauperis application. Petitioner now
25 requests the Court provide relief from judgment based on Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) for
26 newly discovered evidence, fraud, void judgment, or any other reason justifying
27 relief.
28

Rule 60(c) requires a motion seeking relief pursuant to Rule 60(b) be within
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT ~ 1

Case 4:19-cv-05279-SAB

ECF No. 16

filed 03/06/25

PageID.314

Page 2 of 2

1 one year of judgment for allegations of (1) mistake, (2) newly discovered evidence,
2 or (3) fraud. Time is not limited for (4) judgment that is void, (5) judgment
3 satisfied, released, or discharged, or (6) any other justifiable reason.
4

Petitioner filed this Motion nearly five years after the Court’s final order on

5 April 28, 2020. Therefore, he is time-barred from seeking relief as to Rule
6 60(b)(1), (2), and (3). Further, he has not provided any facts to show his judgment
7 in this matter is void, satisfied, released, or discharged. There is no other justifiable
8 reason why this Court should provide relief from its judgment dismissing this
9 matter for failure to comply with Habeas Rule 3(a)(2). As such, the Court denies
10 Petitioner’s Motion.
11

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

12

1.

Petitioner’s Motion for Relief from Judgment and Order F.R.C.P.

13 Rule 60(b)(2) Newly Discovered Evidence; (3) Fraud; (4) Void Judgment; (6) Any
14 Other Reason Justifying Relief from Operation of Judgment, ECF No. 15, is
15 DENIED.
16

IT IS SO ORDERED. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter this Order,

17 provide copies to pro se Petitioner, and keep the file closed.
18

DATED this 6th day of March 2025.

19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Stanley A. Bastian

Chief United States District Judge

26
27
28
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT ~ 2