United States District Court, E.D. California
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 ...