Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05399/USCOURTS-cand-3_09-cv-05399-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RODERICK COLEMAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

FORDE - Deputy; et al., 

Defendants. /

No. C 09-5399 MHP (pr)

ORDER

This pro se civil rights action was filed on November 17, 2009, at which time plaintiff

was notified that his action was deficient because he had not filed a completed in forma

pauperis application or paid the filing fee and was notified that he had to cure the deficiency

within thirty days. He did not do so. The action was dismissed on February 23, 2010

because plaintiff had failed to pay the filing fee or furnish a completed in forma pauperis

application. Plaintiff then filed a motion for reconsideration, urging that sometimes he had

problems with legal mail at the county jail. He did not, however, show that he did not

receive the notice of the deficiency, and did not show that he ever filed a completed in forma

pauperis application, or even that he attempted to do so during the several months this action

was pending. He has not presented newly discovered evidence, the court did not commit

clear error or make a manifestly unjust decision as dismissal was proper, and there has not

been a change in controlling law. See School Dist. No. 11 v. ACandS, Inc., 5 F.3d 1255,

Case 3:09-cv-05399-MHP Document 8 Filed 07/28/10 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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 2

1263 (9th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 512 U.S. 1236 (1994); Civil L.R. 7-9. Plaintiff's motion

for reconsideration is DENIED. (Docket # 7.) 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 28, 2010 _______________________

 Marilyn Hall Patel

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cv-05399-MHP Document 8 Filed 07/28/10 Page 2 of 2