Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-00692/USCOURTS-azd-2_13-cv-00692-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

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 

27 

28 

MGD 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Christopher J. Soto, Sr., 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

Matt Ritter, 

Defendant. 

No. CV 13-0692-PHX-DGC (MEA) 

ORDER 

On April 4, 2013, Plaintiff Christopher J. Soto, Sr., who is confined in the Pinal 

County Jail in Florence, Arizona, filed a pro se civil rights Complaint pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. 1) and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2). In an 

Order dated May 20, 2013, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint for failure to state a 

claim and instructed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment accordingly. (Doc. 14.) 

Judgment was entered on that same day. (Doc. 16.) 

On June 21, 2013, Plaintiff filed a document titled “Requesting the Decree of 

Assurance” (Doc. 18), in which he asks the Court “what procedures have been ordered by 

the courts to assure that plaintiff’s claim has been resolved and will not accure (sic) as 

problems do still show adverse affect to the Plaintiff.” Plaintiff cites to Friends of the 

Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Environmental Services (TOC), Inc., 528 U.S. 167 (2000), and 

asks the Court to submit “a decree outlining the assurance that these violations will not 

accure pursu[]ant to [Laidlaw].” 

Case 2:13-cv-00692-DGC--MEA Document 22 Filed 08/13/13 Page 1 of 2
- 2 - 

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 

27 

28 

Plaintiff’s Complaint was dismissed for failure to state a claim against his criminal 

defense attorney and this case was closed on May 20, 2013. Plaintiff’s request provides 

no basis for reconsideration of the dismissal of this action or any other relief. 

 IT IS ORDERED that to the extent that Plaintiff seeks any relief in his request 

(Doc. 18), such relief is denied. 

 Dated this 13th day of August, 2013. 

Case 2:13-cv-00692-DGC--MEA Document 22 Filed 08/13/13 Page 2 of 2