Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03078/USCOURTS-cand-3_15-cv-03078-6/pdf.json

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

---

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DENYS NAMYSTIUK,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SMITH BARNEY and JAINA SYSTEMS

NETWORK, INC.,

Defendants. /

No. C 15-03078 WHA

ORDER DENYING SECOND

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

After plaintiff Denys Namystiuk failed to appear at the initial case management

conference, an order dismissed his case for failure to prosecute and for lack of subject-matter

jurisdiction because the complaint was incomprehensible (Dkt. No. 22). Plaintiff then filed a

motion for reconsideration, stating that he would not come to the United States to litigate this

case and wished to remain in the Ukraine, and litigate via phone conference. An order denied

that motion (Dkt. No. 27).

Now plaintiff has filed a second motion titled “motion for leave to file 1th [sic] motion

for reconsideration.” This second motion again states that plaintiff will not come to the United

States to litigate and raises essentially the same points made in plaintiff’s first motion for

reconsideration. Plaintiff’s second motion for reconsideration is largely incomprehensible, adds

nothing not addressed in plaintiff’s first motion, and is thus DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 7, 2015. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:15-cv-03078-WHA Document 31 Filed 12/07/15 Page 1 of 1