IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
November 9, 2011
ISIAH LUCAS, JR.,
GARY SWARTHOUT, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. United States District Judge
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending before the court is plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of the order denying his motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. 27).
Under Rule 60(b), the court may grant reconsideration of a final judgment and any order based on, among other things: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence which, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered within ten days of entry of judgment; and (3) fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct of an opposing party. A motion for reconsideration on any of these grounds must be brought within a reasonable time and no later than one year of entry of judgment or the order being challenged. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(c)(1).
Plaintiff provides no adequate reason for the court to reconsider the order denying his motion for preliminary injunction. A review of the order shows no basis for granting reconsideration. There was no mistake, new evidence or misconduct involved. As the court stated in its prior orders, none of the defendants in this action would appear to have any control over plaintiff's cell assignment at his current institution. Nothing in his current motion would indicate otherwise. This court is unable to issue an order against individuals who are not parties to this action. See Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc., 395 U.S. 100, 112 (1969).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's motion for reconsideration (Doc. 19) is denied.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.