Tyler v. Knowles et al
Filing
46
ORDER signed by District Judge Otis D. Wright, II, on 6/24/11, ORDERING that 44 defendants' motion to dismiss this case is GRANTED, and this matter is DISMISSED with prejudice. Plaintff's 43 motion for relief from judgment, is DENIED. CASE CLOSED (Kastilahn, A)
<![CDATA[
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
ELONZA JESSE TYLER,
Plaintiff,
13
14
vs.
17
18
No. 2:08-CV-02222-ODW
)
ORDER
)
)
15
16
)
MIKE E. KNOWLES, et al.
Defendants.
)
)
____________________________)
19
20
Defendants move for an order of dismissal predicated on Plaintiffs failure to
21
comply with previous orders of this court to furnish security. [44] The court has
22
considered the motion, the points and authorities supporting that motion and the court’s
23
docket and finds as follows:
24
On December 30, 2010 this court entered an order [35] declaring plaintiff to be a
25
vexatious litigant within the meaning of Eastern District Local Rule 65.1-151(b) and
26
Section 391(b)(1)-(3) of the California Code of Civil Procedure. The Court specifically
27
ordered that plaintiff furnish security in the sum of eight hundred and fifty dollars
28
($850.00). Plaintiff did not comply with that order.
Again, by order dated March 24,
1
2011 plaintiff was ordered to furnish security by April 14, 2011 or face dismissal of this
2
action. Plaintiff did not comply with that order. Consequently,
3
IT IS ORDERED:
4
Defendants’ motion to dismiss this action is GRANTED and this matter is
5
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
6
FURTHERMORE. Plaintiff’s motion for “relief from judgment rule 60 Fed. R.
7
Civ. P” [43] which the court construes as a motion for reconsideration fails to set forth
8
sufficient grounds for the court to reconsider it prior order. Plaintiff’s only admission of
9
excusable neglect is his “oversight in arranging the order of the documents sent to the
10
Court.” The arrangement of plaintiff documents had no bearing on the court’s
11
determination that plaintiff should be declared a vexatious litigant.
12
Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DATED: June 24, 2011
___________________________
OTIS D. WRIGHT, II,
DISTRICT JUDGE
]]>
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?
