Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-01365/USCOURTS-azd-2_11-cv-01365-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
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 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Howard Cochran, 

Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

Sudha Rao, 

Defendant. 

No. CV 11-1365-PHX-RCB 

 O R D E R 

 Pending before the Court is a Motion for Reconsideration. (Doc. 69.) The Court 

will deny the Motion and direct Plaintiff to file his request with the United States Court 

of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 

I. Background 

 Plaintiff filed a civil rights action and First and Second Amended Complaints. 

(Docs. 1, 7, 9.) On March 26, 2013, the Court granted Defendant summary judgment, 

denied Plaintiff summary judgment, and entered an Order of dismissal. (Docs. 62, 63.) 

On April 4, 2013, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Appeal. (Doc. 64.) On April 11, 2013, the 

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals provided Plaintiff an authorization to be completed within 

21 days, with instructions that if Plaintiff/Appellant did not comply with the Order, the 

appeal could be dismissed. (Doc. 67.) On May 14, 2013, the Court of Appeals issued its 

mandate dismissing the appeal. (Doc. 68.) 

Case 2:11-cv-01365-RCB Document 70 Filed 06/03/13 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 

 On May 23, 2013, Plaintiff filed his Motion for Reconsideration stating that he 

“never received the info[rmation] for which Plaintiff[’s] case was dismiss[ed]. Plaintiff 

received a[n] incomplete order. Plaintiff never received a prisoner authoriza[tion] form.” 

Plaintiff asks the Court for an opportunity to receive the information and to comply with 

the Order. (Doc. 69.) 

 Although this motion was docketed as a Motion for Reconsideration of the Order 

of this Court on summary judgment, it appears from the timing of events and the contents 

of the Motion that Plaintiff is actually seeking relief from the Mandate from the Ninth 

Circuit. This Court is without authority to grant Plaintiff the relief that he appears to 

seek. Plaintiff should direct his request to the United States Court of Appeals for the 

Ninth Circuit. The Court will direct the Clerk of Court to provide Plaintiff with copies of 

the relevant Order and Mandate. 

IT IS ORDERED: 

(1) The reference to the Magistrate is withdrawn as to the Motion for 

Reconsideration (Doc. 69). 

 (2) The Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 69) is denied without prejudice. 

 (3) The Clerk of Court must correct the docket entry to reflect that the Motion 

for Reconsideration is for reconsideration of the Order and Mandate from the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Docs. 67, 68). 

 (4) The Clerk of Court must provide Plaintiff with copies of the Order and 

Mandate (Docs. 67, 68). 

 DATED this 30th day of May, 2013. 

Case 2:11-cv-01365-RCB Document 70 Filed 06/03/13 Page 2 of 2