UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 10, 2007
KARLUK KHAN MAYWEATHERS, PLAINTIFF,
R. Q. HICKMAN, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Cathy Ann Bencivengo United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER REGARDING BOXES OF DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY PLAINTIFF TO THE COURT
This case is brought by a state prisoner proceeding pro se under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 8, 2007, the court received from Plaintiff three large cardboard boxes full of miscellaneous papers which included pleadings, various documents, and magazines. There was no written explanation of what the documents were and why they were submitted. Therefore the purpose of this submission and the relation of the papers to the present case cannot be determined. The attempted filing also violated numerous Local Rules. The entire three boxes could not be accepted for filing and will be returned to Plaintiff. Plaintiff will also be sent a copy of the discrepancy order which specifies the reasons for the rejection.
It appears that Plaintiff's attempted filing contains original documents. To ensure the integrity of Plaintiff's papers, the court staff did not rearrange or remove any of the documents. The papers are mailed back to Plaintiff in the exact same condition they arrived in.
The Court notes that on July 31, 2007, the undersigned Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") finding that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment should be denied because the motion was not supported by evidence. The objections to the R&R are due on August 27, 2007. In the event the documents in the boxes represented Plaintiff's attempt to submit evidentiary support for his objections to the R&R, Plaintiff may re-file the documents as long as they are duly organized, identified and attached to a legal document captioned "Objections to Report and Recommendation." The Objections to Report and Recommendation should explain the relation of the documents to the present case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.