Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_99-cv-06016/USCOURTS-caed-1_99-cv-06016-0/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

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

Plaintiff Robert Trevino (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis in this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court adopted findings and 

recommendations to grant the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment for failure to exhaust 

administrative remedies, and the Clerk of Court entered judgment and closed the case. Over thirteen

years later, Plaintiff now seeks to amend or reopen the complaint, alleging continued retaliation on 

various dates, the last such incident having occurred on July 15, 2011. (ECF No. 57.)

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) provides relief from a final judgment or order under

certain circumstances. A party must bring its Rule 60(b) motion within a reasonable time and for

certain reasons, no later than one year after entry of judgment. Thus, even if Plaintiff alleged a

permissible reason for reopening the judgment, this motion would be precluded as untimely.

ROBERT TREVINO,

 Plaintiff,

v.

JAMES GOMEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:99-cv-06016-LJO-BAM (PC)

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO AMEND OR 

REOPEN COMPLAINT

(ECF No. 57)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO 

UPDATE ADDRESS OF RECORD

Case 1:99-cv-06016-LJO-BAM Document 59 Filed 10/26/15 Page 1 of 2
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

The motion does not seek to reopen the judgment for reasons relating to the former action,

however. Instead, Plaintiff alleges multiple instances of retaliation that occurred thereafter. The

appropriate procedure for pursuing claims that arose following the prior action is by the filing of a new 

complaint alleging the new claims. (The Court notes that since Plaintiff is currently detained at Salinas 

Valley Prison, proper venue for any new complaint is the U.S. District Court for the Northern District 

of California.)

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

1. Plaintiff's motion to amend or reopen this case is DENIED; and

2. The Clerk of Court is directed to update Plaintiff address of record as follows and serve 

this order on him at: Robert Trevino, J-64367, P.O. Box 1050, Salinas Valley Prison, Soledad, CA 

93960.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 23, 2015 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:99-cv-06016-LJO-BAM Document 59 Filed 10/26/15 Page 2 of 2