Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01527/USCOURTS-caed-1_12-cv-01527-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens 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

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TONY EDWARD POWELL,

Plaintiff,

v.

MADDEN, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:12-cv-01527-AWI-BAM PC

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S PETITION

FOR DIRECTIONS AS TO SUMMONS AND

INQUIRY OF THE COURT’S EXPECTATIONS

WHEN REOPENING MR. POWELL’S CLAIM

(ECF NO. 14)

Plaintiff TonyEdward Powell (“Plaintiff”) is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil

action pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S.

388, 91 S.Ct. 1999 (1971), which provides a remedy for violation of civil rights by federal actors. 

On November 27, 2012, this action was dismissed, without prejudice, for Plaintiff’s failure to pay

the filing fee and judgment was entered. (ECF Nos. 9, 10.) On December 20, 2012, Plaintiff filed

a motion to reopen the proceedings. (ECF No. 11.) The Court denied the motion on December 26,

2012. (ECF No. 12.) Plaintiff filed a second motion to reopen this action on December 26, 2012. 

(ECF No. 13.) On January 4, 2013, the Court denied the motion. (ECF No. 15.) Prior to the Court’s

January 4, 2013 order, Plaintiff filed the instant “Petition for Directions as to Summons and Inquiry

of the Court’s Expectations When Reopening Mr. Powell’s Claim.” (ECF No. 14.)

Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction and the Court is bound by the requirement

that as a preliminary matter, it have before it an actual case or controversy. City of Los Angeles v.

Lyons, 461 U.S. 95, 102 (1983); Valley Forge Christian Coll. v. Ams. United for Separation of

Church and State, Inc., 454 U.S. 464, 471 (1982). If the Court does not have an actual case or

1

Case 1:12-cv-01527-AWI-BAM Document 16 Filed 01/07/13 Page 1 of 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

controversy before it, it has no power to hear the matter in question. Id. Here, the case or

controversy requirement cannot be met because this case has been dismissed and closed.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s instant petition is DENIED. Any further petitions, motions or filings in this

closed action will be stricken from the record. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: January 7, 2013 /s/ Barbara A. McAuliffe 

10c20k UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2

Case 1:12-cv-01527-AWI-BAM Document 16 Filed 01/07/13 Page 2 of 2