Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_17-cv-01002/USCOURTS-caed-1_17-cv-01002-6/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

LYRALISA LAVENA STEVENS,

Plaintiff,

v.

JEFFREY A. BEARD, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:17-cv-01002-AWI-SAB (PC)

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION 

TO VACATE PRIOR JUDGMENT AND 

MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE

(ECF Nos. 57, 59)

Plaintiff Lyralisa Lavena Stevens is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil 

rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Currently before the Court is Plaintiff’s motion to vacate the previous entry of judgment 

and motion for judicial notice, filed February 17, 2023. (ECF Nos. 57, 59.) 

To the extent Plaintiff seeks an order vacating the prior judgment entered on March 28, 

2019 (ECF No. 39), such request is moot as the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth 

Circuit reversed said judgment and remanded the action back to this Court on December 19, 

2022. (ECF Nos. 49, 50.) Consequently, Plaintiff’s motion to vacate the prior judgment is moot.

To the extent Plaintiff seeks an order taking judicial notice of certain documents, his 

request must be denied. “A judicially noticed fact must be one not subject to reasonable dispute 

in that it is either (1) generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court or (2) 

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

Case 1:17-cv-01002-JLT-SAB Document 61 Filed 02/21/23 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

reasonably be questioned.” Fed. R. Evid. 201(b). “A court shall take judicial notice if requested 

by a party and supplied with the necessary information.” Fed. R. Evid. 201(d).

The court may take judicial notice of court records. Valerio v. Boise Cascade Corp., 80

F.R.D. 626, 635 n.l (N.D. Cal.1978). “Judicial notice is an adjudicative device that alleviates the 

parties' evidentiary duties at trial, serving as a substitute for the conventional method of taking 

evidence to establish facts.” York v. American Tel. & Tel. Co., 95 F.3d 948, 958 (10th

Cir.1996) (internal quotations omitted); see also General Elec. Capital Corp. v. Lease Resolution

Corp., 128 F.3d 1074, 1081 (7th Cir.1997).

Plaintiff simply submits several exhibits and requests judicial notice. The Court does not 

take judicial notice of facts in a vacuum. A request for judicial notice must be made in the 

context of some proceeding in which the facts are to be placed in evidence. Plaintiff has not 

demonstrated that these documents are related to his claims or that such documents are subject to 

judicial notice. 

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff’s motion to vacate the prior judgment (ECF No. 57) is denied as moot; 

and

2. Plaintiff’s motion for judicial notice (ECF No. 59) is denied. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 21, 2023 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:17-cv-01002-JLT-SAB Document 61 Filed 02/21/23 Page 2 of 2