UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 31, 2012
K. KODGER, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER DENYING REQUEST FOR RETURN OF FUNDS (DOC. 16)
Plaintiff James Grimes ("Plaintiff") is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action. On June 3, 2011, the Court dismissed this action for failure to state a claim. Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's motion, filed May 29, 2012, entitled "Request of Balance Due and/or Return of Funds." Doc. 16. The Court construes the request as one for a return of any money paid by Plaintiff for the $350.00 filing fee.
The motion is denied. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2), prisoners are required to pay the filing fee for civil actions in full, even if they are proceeding in forma pauperis, with no exception.
Plaintiff also contends that he stated a claim in this action. The Court construes this portion of the motion as one for reconsideration, pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) governs relief from orders of the district court. The Rule permits a district court to relieve a party from a final order or judgment on grounds of: "(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; . . . (3) fraud . . . by an opposing party, . . . or (6) any other reason that justifies relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). The motion for reconsideration must be made within a reasonable time. Id.
Rule 60(b)(6) "is to be used sparingly as an equitable remedy to prevent manifest injustice and is to be utilized only where extraordinary circumstances . . ." exist. Harvest v. Castro, 531 F.3d 737, 749 (9th Cir. 2008) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The moving party "must demonstrate both injury and circumstances beyond his control . . . ." Id. (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Local Rule 230(j) requires Plaintiff to show "what new or different facts or circumstances are claimed to exist which did not exist or were not shown upon such prior motion, or what other grounds exist for the motion."
To the extent that Plaintiff seeks reconsideration, Plaintiff's motion is denied. Plaintiff presents no arguments that merit reconsideration.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.