Coronado v. Yarborough

          ORDER GRANTING IN PART PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR COPIES ORDER DENYING PETITIONER'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT (ECF NO. 30)

         Petitioner is a state prisoner who filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On March 31, 2008, ^[1] the Court denied the petition and entered judgment. (ECF Nos. 28, 29). On August 19, 2019, the Court received the instant motion for copies and motion for relief from judgment. (ECF No. 30).

         I. DISCUSSION

         A. Motion for Copies

         Petitioner requests copies of his petition, the response, and "all paperwork pertain[ing] to this claim." (ECF No. 30). The Court notes that because the instant case commenced fourteen years ago and was closed eleven years ago, some of the documents, such as his petition, are not currently available. Accordingly, the Court will grant the motion for copies in part and provide Petitioner with copies of the docket sheet, the answer, supplemental points and authorities, the traverse, the findings and recommendation, and the order adopting the findings and recommendation. (ECF Nos. 15, 19, 22, 27, 28).

         Petitioner is advised, however, that the Court will not grant any further requests for copies of pleadings or other documents in the Court's file. Should Petitioner need copies of documents filed in this case, he is advised that the Schedule of Fees for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California requires a prepayment of fifty cents a page for documents in the Court's file. Plaintiff may file a request with the Clerk's Office to advise him of the number of pages of any documents he needs, but will not provide copies without prepayment of fees.^[2]

         B. Motion for Relief from Judgment Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides:

         On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons:

(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;

(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial under Rule 59(b);

(3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic) misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party;

(4) the judgment is void;

(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged; it is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or

(6) any other reason that justifies relief.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). "A motion under Rule 60(b) must be made within a reasonable time-and for reasons (1), (2), and (3) no more than a year after the entry of the judgment or order or the date of the ...