Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00386/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-00386-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1981 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

MOODY WOODROW TANKSLEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

SUTTER GENERAL EMERGENCY 

ROOM, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 2:15-cv-386-TLN-CKD

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

RECONSIDER

Plaintiff Moody Woodrow Tanksley (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed the instant 

action against the Sutter General Emergency Room (“Defendant”) on February 18, 2015. 

(Compl., ECF No. 1.) On March 19, 2015, Magistrate Carolyn k. Delaney issued a Finding and 

Recommendation (“F&R”), advising that Plaintiff’s claims be denied and that the case be closed. 

(F&R, ECF No. 5.) On April 13, 2015, this Court adopted the F&R and ordered that the case be 

closed. (Order, ECF No. 7.) Plaintiff has filed a Motion for Reconsideration. (ECF No. 10.) 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) (“Rule 60”) states as follows:

On motion and just terms, the court may relieve a party or its legal 

representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the 

following reasons:

(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect;

(2) newly discovered evidence that, with reasonable diligence, 

could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial 

Case 2:15-cv-00386-TLN-CKD Document 11 Filed 10/09/15 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

under Rule 59(b);

(3) fraud (whether previously called intrinsic or extrinsic), 

misrepresentation, or misconduct by an opposing party;

(4) the judgment is void;

(5) the judgment has been satisfied, released, or discharged; it is 

based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated; or 

applying it prospectively is no longer equitable; or

(6) any other reason that justifies relief.

Therefore, for relief to be afforded, Plaintiff must meet one of Rule 60(b)’s criteria for relief. 

Plaintiff’s motion is full of ramblings and conspiracy theories without any factual 

allegations that could support relief under Rule 60(b). Plaintiff has not met this burden and 

cannot be afforded relief. As such, Plaintiff’s motion (ECF No. 10) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 8, 2015

Case 2:15-cv-00386-TLN-CKD Document 11 Filed 10/09/15 Page 2 of 2