Scott v. Van Hook

Filing 34

ORDER Denying Plaintiff's 30 Motion to Re-note Motions, by Magistrate Judge David W. Christel. (GMR- cc: pltf)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA 6 7 8 RICHARD ROY SCOTT, Plaintiff, 9 10 11 ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RENOTE v. VAN HOOK, Defendant. 12 13 CASE NO. 3:16-CV-05785-RBL-DWC The District Court referred this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action to United States Magistrate 14 Judge David W. Christel. Plaintiff Richard Roy Scott, a civil detainee proceeding pro se and in 15 forma pauperis (“IFP”), initiated this action on September 6, 2016. See Dkt. 1. Currently before 16 the Court is a document filed by Plaintiff titled “Re-noting Mts DK#s 8 and 10” (“Motion”), 17 wherein Plaintiff requests the Court re-note two motions which were previously denied by this 18 Court. Dkt. 30. 19 Plaintiff requests the Court re-note the “Motion for Leave to Conduct Discovery of 20 Defendant Hook Motion for TRO” (“Motion for Discovery”) and “Motion for Expert Funding 21 and Special Master or Standby Lawyer” (“Motion for Special Master”) because the motions are 22 now ripe for review. Dkt. 8, 10, 30. These two motions were ready for the Court’s consideration 23 in October of 2016. See Dkt. 8, 10. On November 15, 2016, the Court denied the motions as 24 ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RE-NOTE - 1 1 premature and in violation of Plaintiff’s case management orders. Dkt. 18. The Court declines to 2 vacate its previous decision and revive the motions simply because Plaintiff asserts the motions 3 are ripe for review. Accordingly, the Motion is denied. 1 See Whitney v. Edwards, 1994 WL 4 478814, at *1 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 29, 1994) (denying plaintiff’s request to revive issues decided in 5 previous orders). 6 Dated this 22nd day of February, 2017. A 7 8 David W. Christel United States Magistrate Judge 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 1 The Court notes nothing in this order prevents Plaintiff from filing new motions regarding his requests for 24 discovery and for a special master. ORDER DENYING MOTION TO RE-NOTE - 2

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?