(PC) Stevens v. Beard ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 8 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 LYRALISA LAVENA STEVENS, Case No. 1:17-cv-01002-AWI-SAB (PC) 10 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 11 TO VACATE PRIOR JUDGMENT AND v. MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE 12 JEFFREY A. BEARD, et al., (ECF Nos. 57, 59) 13 Defendants. 14 15 16 Plaintiff Lyralisa Lavena Stevens is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 17 rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 18 Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to vacate the previous entry of judgment 19 and motion for judicial notice, filed February 17, 2023. (ECF Nos. 57, 59.) 20 To the extent Plaintiff seeks an order vacating the prior judgment entered on March 28, 21 2019 (ECF No. 39), such request is moot as the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth 22 Circuit reversed said judgment and remanded the action back to this Court on December 19, 23 2022. (ECF Nos. 49, 50.) Consequently, Plaintiff’s motion to vacate the prior judgment is moot. 24 To the extent Plaintiff seeks an order taking judicial notice of certain documents, his 25 request must be denied. “A judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute 26 in that it is either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) 27 capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.” Fed. R. Evid. 201(b). “A court shall take judicial notice if requested by a party and supplied with the necessary information.” Fed. R. Evid. 201(d). ° The court may take judicial notice of court records. Valerio v. Boise Cascade Corp., 80 ‘ F.R.D. 626, 635 n.1 (N.D. Cal.1978). “Judicial notice is an adjudicative device that alleviates the ° parties’ evidentiary duties at trial, serving as a substitute for the conventional method of taking 6 evidence to establish facts.” York v. American Tel. & Tel. Co.,95 F.3d 948, 958 (10th 1996) (internal quotations omitted); see also General Elec. Capital Corp. v. Lease Resolution Corp., 128 F.3d 1074, 1081 (7th Cir.1997). Plaintiff simply submits several exhibits and requests judicial notice. The Court does not 10 take judicial notice of facts in a vacuum. A request for judicial notice must be made in the context of some proceeding in which the facts are to be placed in evidence. Plaintiff has not 2 demonstrated that these documents are related to his claims or that such documents are subject to 8 judicial notice. Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff's motion to vacate the prior judgment (ECF No. 57) is denied as moot; '6 and "7 2. Plaintiff's motion for judicial notice (ECF No. 59) is denied. 18 19 | IT IS SO ORDERED. Al fe 70 | Dated: _ February 21, 2023 IF 2] UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28