Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01578/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01578-21/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

U N ITED STATES DISTRICT COU RT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MICHAEL ANTHONY VICTORY,

Plaintiff,

v.

SCHWARZENEGGER, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

CASE NO. 1:05-cv-01578-LJO-DLB (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

FOR RELIEF FROM COURT’S ORDER TO

VACATE

(Docs. 66, 76 )

Plaintiff Michael Anthony Victory (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 28, 2009, Plaintiff filed a

motion seeking relief from the Court’s order to vacate and clarification of order. (Doc. 66.)

Plaintiff refers to the Court’s September 4, 2009 order, which vacated the Court’s Findings and

Recommendations, filed February 26, 2009, and vacated the Court’s March 23, 2009 order

adopting the Findings and Recommendations. Plaintiff also contests the Findings and

Recommendation filed September 16, 2009. Plaintiff filed a similar motion on November 23,

2009, though it is described as a Rule 60(b) motion. (Doc. 76.) Defendants filed an opposition

to the second motion on January 8, 2010. (Doc. 79.)

Plaintiff contends that the Court erred in vacating its order and issuing a new Findings

and Recommendations. Defendants contend that the Court lacks jurisdiction over a Rule 60(b)

motion because there has been no final order in this action and the Rule 60(b) motion raised the

same issues that Plaintiff raised on appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth

Circuit. However, on January 20, 2010, the Ninth Circuit issued an order dismissing Plaintiff’s

1

Case 1:05-cv-01578-LJO -DLB Document 83 Filed 01/28/10 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

appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Thus, the Court has jurisdiction to consider Plaintiff’s Rule 60(b)

motion.

Motions to reconsider are committed to the discretion of the trial court. Rodgers v. Watt,

722 F.2d 456, 460 (9th Cir. 1983) (en banc); Combs v. Nick Garin Trucking, 825 F.2d 437, 441

(D.C.Cir. 1987). A party seeking reconsideration must set forth facts or law of a strongly

convincing nature to induce the court to reverse a prior decision. See, e.g., Kern-Tulare Water

Dist. v. City of Bakersfield, 634 F. Supp. 656, 665 (E.D. Cal. 1986), aff’d in part and rev’d in

part on other grounds, 828 F.2d 514 (9th Cir. 1987). This Court’s Local Rule 230(j) requires a

party seeking reconsideration to demonstrate “what new or different facts or circumstances are

claimed to exist which did not exist or were not shown upon such prior motion, or what other

grounds exist for the motion.”

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b), an order “that adjudicates fewer than

all the claims or the rights and liabilities of fewer than all the parties does not end the action as to

any of the claims or parties and may be revised at any time before the entry of a judgment

adjudicating all the claims and all the parties’ rights and liabilities.” The Court revised one of its

orders in this action, which did not adjudicate all of plaintiff’s claims against all the parties.1

Plaintiff’s arguments are unavailing.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motions, filed September 28,

2009 and November 23, 2009, are DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 28, 2010 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Plaintiff’s Rule 60(b) motion primarily discussed the merits and applicability of Federal Rule of Civil

1

Procedure 60(a), which the Court had cited. The citation to Rule 60(a) was incorrect. The Court’s proper authority

for revising its previous orders in this action is Rule 54(b).

2

Case 1:05-cv-01578-LJO -DLB Document 83 Filed 01/28/10 Page 2 of 2