Goods v. Bakersfield Police Department ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHARLES GOODS, ) Case No.: 1:19-cv-00663-DAD-JLT ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ) COPIES 13 v. ) 14 BAKERSFIELD POLICE DEPT., ) (Doc. 13) ) 15 Defendant. ) ) 16 17 On September 12, 2019, Plaintiff filed a request for copies of documents in the case he initiated 18 on July 31, 2017 (Doc. 13). The action initiated by Plaintiff on that date was Case No. 1:17-cv-1009- 19 DAD-JLT, which was closed on January 24, 2018.1 In the past month, Plaintiff filed two requests for 20 copies of documents in that action. (See Case No. 1:17-cv-1009-DAD-JLT, Docs. 8, 10) The Court 21 denied Plaintiff’s requests, because the matter has been closed for more than eighteen months and the 22 copies were not necessary for the prosecution of the matter. Again, Plaintiff fails to explain why he 23 needs copies of documents from that action, and it does not appear such documents would be relevant 24 for the prosecution of the matter now pending before the Court. 25 As Plaintiff was previously informed, he may purchase a copy of records on the docket for that 26 1 A court may take judicial notice of its own docket. See Fed. R. Evid. 201(b); United States v. Bernal-Obeso, 989 27 F.2d 331, 333 (9th Cir.1993); Valerio v. Boise Cascade Corp., 80 F.R.D. 626, 635 n. 1 (N.D.Cal.1978), aff’d, 645 F.2d 699 (9th Cir.1981) (judicial notice may be taken of court record). Accordingly, the Court takes judicial notice of the docket in 28 1 action at the Clerk’s Office at the Robert E. Coyle Federal Courthouse, 2500 Tulare Street, Room 1501, 2 Fresno, CA 93721, 559-499-5600. 3 Accordingly, the Court ORDERS: Plaintiff’s motion for copies of documents in Case No. 4 1:17-cv-1009-DAD-JLT (Doc. 13) is DENIED. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: September 17, 2019 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28