Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Chukwuma Azubuko v. Framingham State College

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


June 11, 2012

CHUKWUMA AZUBUKO,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
FRAMINGHAM STATE COLLEGE,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Thomas J. WhelanUnited States District Judge

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT UNDER RULE 60(b) [DOC. 15]

On December 7, 2001, Plaintiff Chukwuma Azubuko, proceeding pro se, filed suit in this Court against Framingham State College.*fn1 (Compl. [Doc. 1].) Azubuko appeared to allege various state and federal claims against professors and administration at Framingham State College. (See id.) On December 11, 2001, the Court sua sponte dismissed Azubuko's complaint without prejudice for improper venue, because it was clear from the complaint that both Azubuko and Framingham State College resided in Massachusetts, and all events relevant to the complaint occurred in Massachusetts. (Dism. Order [Doc. 2]); see Costlow v. Weeks, 790 F.2d 1486, 1488 (9th Cir. 1986).

In the nearly eleven years since this Court dismissed Azubuko's complaint, Azubuko has filed four motions to re-open his case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). (See Mots. Re-open [Docs. 4, 5, 13, 15].) To this point, the Court has consistently rejected those motions for failure to follow the procedural rules of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. (See id.) On one occasion, in 2002, Azubuko appealed this Court's rejection of his motion to re-open to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. (See Not. Appeal [Doc. 6].) The Ninth Circuit summarily affirmed this Court's decision. (Ninth Cir. Order [Doc. 12].)

Azubuko has recently filed another motion to re-open his case, his fourth overall. (Fourth Mot. Re-open [Doc. 15].) The fourth motion, like the others, is largely incomprehensible and fails to address the single reason that his case was dismissed in 2001: improper venue. (See id.) Therefore, the Court DENIES Azubuko's request to reopen his case under Rule 60(b). No additional motions filed by, or on behalf of Azubuko will be considered in this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.