IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
February 12, 2013
GREGORY C. BONTEMPS, PLAINTIFF,
DALE L. LYVELSOM, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Carolyn K. Delaney United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff commenced this action with the filing of a complaint on November 13, 2012. He consented to this court's jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Local Rule 302. (Dkt. No. 4.) By order filed January 24, 2012, the undersigned ordered that this action be dismissed without prejudice due to plaintiff's failure to timely file an application to proceed in forma pauperis. (Dkt. Nos. 5, 6.)
On February 6, 2012, plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of the January 24, 2012 judgment of dismissal. He states that he filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis in this action on November 28, 2012. (Dkt. No. 7 at 1.) The docket does not reflect this, however. Plaintiff's other pending actions in this district do not affect his in forma pauperis status in this action.
Local Rule 305(c) provides: "Upon the entry of a final judgment in any action disposed of by a Magistrate Judge on consent of the parties under the authority of 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and these Rules, an aggrieved party may appeal directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the same manner as governs appeals from any other final judgment of the Court." See Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(c). Moreover, the undersigned's January 24, 2013 order is not "clearly erroneous or contrary to law." See Local Rule 303(f).
Accordingly, plaintiff's February 6, 2013 motion for reconsideration (Dkt. No. 7) is denied.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.