(PC) Carroll v. State of California, et al., No. 1:2023cv00974 - Document 17 (E.D. Cal. 2023)

Court Description: ORDER VACATING 11 Findings and Recommendations Issued August 28, 2023; ORDER DISREGARDING 13 Motion for Reconsideration of In Forma Pauperis, Extension of Time, Injunctive Relief signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 12/19/2023. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 TREMAINE CARROLL, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 No. 1:23-cv-00974 NODJ GSA (PC) ORDER VACATING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ISSUED AUGUST 28, 2023 (ECF No. 11) ORDER DISREGARDING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF IN FORMA PAUPERIS, EXTENSION OF TIME, INJUNCTIVE RELIEF (ECF No. 13) 18 19 Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding in forma pauperis, has filed this civil rights action 20 seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is represented by counsel. The matter was 21 referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 22 302. 23 Before this Court is its outstanding order recommending that this matter be dismissed for 24 failure to comply with a court order, and Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration. ECF Nos. 11, 13, 25 respectively. For the reasons stated below, the outstanding order recommending that this matter 26 be dismissed will be vacated. In addition, Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration will be 27 disregarded. 28 1 1 I. PENDING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ORDER 2 On August 28, 2023, the Court issued an order recommending that this matter be 3 dismissed because Plaintiff had neither paid the filing fee nor filed an application to proceed in 4 forma pauperis. ECF No. 11. Since then, Plaintiff has filed a properly completed in forma 5 pauperis application and has been granted in forma pauperis status. ECF Nos. 12, 14. 6 Consequently, the pending findings and recommendations order is moot. Therefore, it will be 7 vacated. 8 II. MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION 9 On November 11, 2023, Plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration. ECF No. 13. The 10 motion, which is handwritten and signed by Plaintiff, and was not filed by counsel.1 See id. The 11 motion also appears to request an extension of time to file an in forma pauperis application as 12 well as injunctive relief. Id. 13 Because Plaintiff is represented by counsel, and in order to eliminate confusion and the 14 filing of conflicting documents, absent exigent circumstances, going forward the Court will only 15 consider filings docketed by Plaintiff’s counsel. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for 16 reconsideration and all requests in it will be disregarded as improperly filed. 17 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 18 1. The findings and recommendations order issued August 28, 2023 (ECF No. 11), is 19 hereby VACATED, and 2. Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 13) is DISREGARDED for the 20 21 reasons stated above. 22 23 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 24 December 19, 2023 /s/ Gary S. Austin UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 25 26 27 28 1 On the caption page of the motion, it identifies several other cases Plaintiff has before this Court. See ECF No. 13 at 1. 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.