Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01238/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01238-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MURRAY A. POWELL, ) 

 )

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. )

)

CARNIVAL CRUISE LINES and )

DOES 1 through 50, )

 )

Defendants. )

)

) 

No. CV-F-05-1238 REC DLB

ORDER DECLINING TO CONSIDER

PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE

COMMUNICATION OF NOVEMBER

30, 2005, A MOTION FOR

RECONSIDERATION.

On November 7, 2005, the Court heard Plaintiff Murray A.

Powell’s motion to remand and a motion to dismiss by Defendant

Carnival Corporation (“Carnival”), sued as Carnival Cruise Lines. 

By Order filed on November 17, 2005 (“Order”), the Court denied

Plaintiff’s motion, denied Defendant’s motion, and transferred

the action to the Southern District of Florida.

On November 30, 2005, Plaintiff sent a letter to the Court

(the “Letter”). The Letter reiterated Plaintiff’s position that

the case should be returned to the Kern County Superior Court in

Bakersfield. The Court has previously held that it lacks the

authority to grant relief on the grounds Plaintiff presents. 

Case 1:05-cv-01238-REC-DLB Document 21 Filed 12/02/05 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

2

Order at 3-4. Furthermore, the Letter does not appear to have

been served on the opposing party. 

The Court will not deem Plaintiff’s ex parte letter of

November 30, 2005, to be a motion for reconsideration.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 2, 2005 /s/ Robert E. Coyle 

810ha4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01238-REC-DLB Document 21 Filed 12/02/05 Page 2 of 2