Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01093/USCOURTS-caed-2_09-cv-01093-1/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 This matter is deemed to be suitable for decision without oral *

argument. E.D. Cal. R. 230(g).

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THOMAS CLIFTON, )

)

Plaintiff, ) 2:09-cv-01093-GEB-GGH

)

v. ) ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

) MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION*

ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, DAVE SHAW, )

EDMUND G. BROWN JR., MATHEW CATE, )

U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC H. )

HOLDER, JAN SCULLY, ROBERT BURNS, )

GERALD T. SHEA, DAVID GRANT, )

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE INSPECTOR )

GENERAL GLEN A. FINN, DEPUTY )

ATTORNEY GENERAL JEFF STEEL, JOHN )

DOE ONE, JOHN DOE TWO, JOHN DOE )

THREE, JOHN DOE FOUR, )

)

Defendants. )

)

On December 4, 2009 Plaintiff filed a motion for 

reconsideration in which it appears he wants the dismissal of his case

to be reconsidered because “[o]n October 20, 2009, Magistrate Brennan

issued an order granting amendment” of Plaintiff’s complaint. (Mot.

1). The order granting Plaintiff leave to amend, however, was issued

in another case, Clifton v. Arnold Schwarzenegger, et al., 2:09-cv1351-FCD-EFB. In this case, an order adopting the findings and

recommendations of Magistrate Judge Gregory Hollows dismissing this

Case 2:09-cv-01093-GEB-GGH Document 8 Filed 03/01/10 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

case was issued on November 30, 2009. Plaintiff has not been given

leave to amend in this case. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for

reconsideration is denied.

Dated: February 26, 2010

 

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:09-cv-01093-GEB-GGH Document 8 Filed 03/01/10 Page 2 of 2