Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00759/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00759-1/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

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

BRIAN CRUZ,

Plaintiff,

v.

SCHWARZENEGGER, et. al.,

Defendants.

 /

CV F 06 759 AWI LJO P 

ORDER DENYING MOTION REQUESTING

JUDICIAL NOTICE (Doc. 10.) 

 Brian Cruz (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action

filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

On July 11, 2006, Plaintiff filed a pleading titled “Emergency Motion Requesting Court

Take Judicial Notice” in which he states that new facts have arisen requiring the Court hear the

Motion for Temporary Restraining Order immediately.

Plaintiff has been informed previously that the Court may take judicial notice of facts that

are capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot

reasonably be questioned. Fed. R. Evid. 201(b); United States v. Bernal-Obeso, 989 F.2d 331,

333 (9th Cir. 1993). Judicial notice may be taken of court records. Valerio v. Boise Cascade

Case 1:06-cv-00759-LJO-GSA Document 11 Filed 07/13/06 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

2

Corp., 80 F.R.D. 626, 635 n. 1 (N.D.Cal.1978), aff'd, 645 F.2d 699 (9th Cir.); see also Colonial

Penn Ins. Co. v. Coil, 887 F.2d 1236, 1239 (4th Cir. 1989); Rodic v. Thistledown Racing Club,

Inc., 615 F.2d 736, 738 (6th Cir. 1980). 

In this case, the type of documentation attached to the Motion are not the type of

documents of which a Court would ordinarily take judicial notice. Further, the fact that Plaintiff

calls something an “Emergency” Motion does not make judicial notice appropriate. The new

facts raised relate to Plaintiff’s pending Motion for Temporary Restraining Order currently

pending before the Court. Plaintiff is advised that his is not the only case of this nature. The

Court has hundreds of similar cases pending at any given time, each warranting the Court’s

attention. The filing of improper Motions only serves to the divert the Court’s attention from

these cases, including Plaintiff’s, in order to resolve these types of Motions. Accordingly, the

Emergency Motion Requesting Judicial Notice is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 13, 2006 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:06-cv-00759-LJO-GSA Document 11 Filed 07/13/06 Page 2 of 2