(PS) Davis v. CA Department of Justice ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 WILLIENE D. DAVIS, Case No. 2:21-cv-01272-DAD-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER DISREGARDING PLAINTIFF’S FILING 13 v. ECF Nos. 20 & 21 14 CA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, 15 Defendant. 16 17 On September 13, 2021, the Clerk of Court closed this case pursuant to plaintiff’s notice 18 of voluntary dismissal. ECF No. 10. Several months later, plaintiff filed a first amended 19 complaint. ECF No. 12. The court subsequently informed plaintiff that she was not permitted to 20 file an amended complaint in a closed case and that if she wished to reopen the case, she must file 21 a motion seeking relief from judgment. ECF No. 14. The court also notified her that it would 22 neither reopen this case nor screen her amended complaint unless such a motion was filed and 23 granted. 24 Plaintiff has since filed two motions requesting the Clerk of Court enter judgment in her 25 favor. Neither of these filings constitute a proper request for relief from the voluntary dismissal 26 of this action. See Kalt v. Hunter, 66 F.3d 1002, 1004 (9th Cir. 1995) (“[A] voluntary dismissal . 27 . . is a judgment, order or proceeding from which Rule 60(b) relief can be granted.”). The filings 28 will therefore be disregarded. Plaintiff is notified that the court will not respond to future filings 1 | in this action that are not authorized by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Federal Rules 2 | of Appellate Procedure. 3 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that plaintiff's July 28, 2022 and August 26, 2022 4 | filings, ECF Nos. 20 & 21, are disregarded. 5 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: _ December 12, 2022 Q_—_—. 8 JEREMY D. PETERSON 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28