Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00012/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00012-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

LEO ARCHER, 

 aka Ricky Thomas,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH,

Respondent.

 /

CV F 07-00012 LJO SMS HC

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S MOTION

FOR RECONSIDERATION

[Doc. 18]

On August 17, 2007, the instant petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2254, was dismissed as duplicative and judgment was entered. (Court Docs. 16, 17.) 

Now pending before the Court is Petitioner’s motion for reconsideration filed on

December 3, 2007. (Court Doc. 18.) 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) governs the reconsideration of final orders of the

district court. The rule permits a district court to relieve a party from a final order or judgment

on the grounds of: “(1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect; (2) newly

discovered evidence which by due diligence could not have been discovered in time to move for

a new trial under Rule 59(b) ; (3) fraud . . . of an adverse party; (4) the judgement is void; (5) the

judgment has been satisfied . . . ; or (6) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of

the judgment.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b). The motion for reconsideration must be made within a

reasonable time, in any event, “not more than one year after the judgment, order, or proceeding

was entered or taken.” Id.

Case 1:07-cv-00012-LJO -SMS Document 19 Filed 05/05/08 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

 The court may take judicial notice of court records. Valerio v. Boise Cascade Corp., 80 F.R.D. 626, 635 1

n.l (N.D. Cal. 1978), aff'd, 645 F.2d 699 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 1126 (1981).

2

In his motion, Petitioner merely states that his prior case 2:04-cv-02249-MCE-KJM-HC,

was dismissed voluntarily, and that he continues to be held as a criminal, not civil detainee. 

Petitioner’s motion must be denied. First, the fact that Petitioner voluntarily dismissed the prior

action does not provide a basis for this Court to reconsider its order of dismissal. In seeking

reconsideration, Petitioner is merely asking the Court to rethink what it has already decided. 

In addition, at the time the instant action was filed Petitioner was housed at the Vacaville

State Facility, then subsequently transferred to Solano State Facility. The Court takes judicial

notice of the fact that on July 16, 2007, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District

of California, Sacramento Division, Petitioner filed a subsequent petition for writ of habeas

corpus in case number 2:07-cv-01401 JAM KJM HC. 

1

No basis for reconsideration under Rule 60(b) has been presented, and Petitioner’s

Motion to Reconsider is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 5, 2008 /s/ Lawrence J. O'Neill 

b9ed48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00012-LJO -SMS Document 19 Filed 05/05/08 Page 2 of 2