Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00904/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-00904-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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

WO KM

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Steven Ho, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Benjamin Griego, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 11-904-PHX-GMS (MEA)

ORDER

On May 5, 2011, Plaintiff Steven Ho, who is confined in the Corrections Corporation

of America-Saguaro Correctional Center (CCA-SCC), filed a pro se civil rights Complaint

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. In a May

18, 2011 Order, the Court granted the Application to Proceed and dismissed the Complaint

because Plaintiff had failed to state a claim. The Court gave Plaintiff 30 days to file an

amended complaint that cured the deficiencies identified in the Order. 

On June 15, 2011, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint. On June 23, 2011,

Plaintiff filed another “First Amended Complaint,” which the Court construed as a Second

Amended Complaint (Doc. 10). On July 6, 2011, the Court dismissed the Second Amended

Complaint and this action for failure to state a claim (Doc. 14), and the Clerk of Court

entered Judgment (Doc. 15). On August 21, 2011, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal to the

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (Doc. 38).

Pending before the Court are the following Motions:

(1) Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time to Make Copies of New Documents

Case 2:11-cv-00904-GMS--MEA Document 44 Filed 09/01/11 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

27

28

- 2 -

(Doc. 27);

(2) Motion to Request Information from Judge Snow (Doc. 26);

(3) Motions Under Rule 56(f) to Obtain Declarations (Docs. 30, 31, and 32);

(4) Motion to Apply Rule 59(e) and Rule 56(f) (Doc. 33);

(5) Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint (Doc. 35);

(6) Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. 36); and

(7) Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 43).

Plaintiff has also filed numerous “Declarations.”

This case has been dismissed and Plaintiff’s Motions are therefore moot. To the

extent that Plaintiff seeks reconsideration of the Court’s dismissal, the Court has already

considered and denied, in an August 4, 2011 Order, Plaintiff’s previous request for

reconsideration.

IT IS ORDERED:

(1) Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time to Make Copies of New Documents

(Doc. 27) is denied.

(2) Plaintiff’s Motion to Request Information from Judge Snow (Doc. 26) is

denied.

(3) Plaintiff’s Motions Under Rule 56(f) to Obtain Declarations (Docs. 30, 31, and

32) are denied.

(4) Plaintiff’s Motion to Apply Rule 59(e) and Rule 56(f) (Doc. 33) is denied.

(5) Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File an Amended Complaint (Doc. 35) is

denied.

(6) Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. 36) is denied.

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

. . .

Case 2:11-cv-00904-GMS--MEA Document 44 Filed 09/01/11 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

27

28

- 3 -

(7) Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 43) is

denied.

DATED this 1st day of September, 2011.

Case 2:11-cv-00904-GMS--MEA Document 44 Filed 09/01/11 Page 3 of 3