Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01837/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-01837-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MARY DEAN REED AND M. DEAN )

REED PRODUCTION COMPANY aka )

THE ALE FACTORY, )

)

)

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. )

)

)

KERN COUNTY POLICE )

DEPARTMENT, et al., )

)

)

)

Defendant. )

)

)

NO. CV-F-06-1837 OWW/TAG

ORDER STRIKING DOCS. 49-51,

DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT NOT

TO FILE ANY FURTHER

PLEADINGS OR PAPERS IN THIS

ACTION AND TO RETURN

MAILINGS TO PLAINTIFF

On April 3, 2007, the United States Magistrate Judge

recommended that this action be dismissed because of Plaintiff’s

failure to comply with a court order that Plaintiff file an

amended complaint and that Plaintiff’s motion to re-instate

complaint, her request to submit song lyrics in lieu of the

filing fee, and her recommendation that this case be combined

with No. CV-F-06-1066 be denied as contrary to law. 

By Order filed on May 21, 2007, the Magistrate Judge’s

Case 1:06-cv-01837-OWW -TAG Document 52 Filed 11/19/07 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

recommendation was adopted by the Court, the action was dismissed

with prejudice for failure to comply with a court order, and all

pending motions filed by Plaintiff were denied as moot. Judgment

dismissing the action with prejudice was entered by the Clerk of

the Court on May 21, 2007 as required by law. 

Plaintiff filed Docs. 43-47 in June 2007. These

pleadings/papers were stricken by Orders filed on July 2, 2007

(Doc. 46) and July 9, 2007 (Doc. 48) because the content of these

pleadings was rambling, incoherent and bizarre and frequently

undecipherable and because the action has been dismissed.

Since the Orders striking these pleadings were filed,

Plaintiff has filed:

1. "Settlement/Scheduling Conference/Hearing

Motion for Contempt of Court for County

Counsel Peter Glich" filed on July 26, 2007

(Doc. 49);

2. "Motion for Scheduling/Settlement

Conference Motion for Contempt of Court"

filed on August 9, 2007 (Doc. 50);

3. "Contempt of Court by County Counsel

(Scheduling Conference)" filed on September

17, 2007 (Doc. 51).

Docs 49-51 are STRICKEN. This action has been dismissed. 

Because no timely appeal from the dismissal of this action has

been filed, the dismissal is final. As Plaintiff has been

advised, there is no basis for scheduling or settlement

conferences and no basis for holding any person or entity in

contempt of court.

Because Plaintiff has disregarded the Court's prior Orders

Case 1:06-cv-01837-OWW -TAG Document 52 Filed 11/19/07 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

3

striking pleadings filed after the dismissal of this action and

because Plaintiff's actions constitute an abuse of process, the

Clerk of the Court is directed to return to Plaintiff any further

pleadings or papers attempted by Plaintiff to be filed in this

action. 

NO FURTHER FILINGS BY PLAINTIFF WILL BE ACCEPTED IN THIS

ACTION.

On June 26, 2007 and on July 7, 2007, Plaintiff shipped an

envelope and a box of loose papers and documents to the Honorable

Oliver W. Wanger. The Clerk of the Court is directed to return

the envelope and the box to Plaintiff.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 19, 2007 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

668554 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-01837-OWW -TAG Document 52 Filed 11/19/07 Page 3 of 3