Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02129/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-02129-5/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
James Clem
Plaintiff
G. Lomeli
Defendant

Document Text:

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

JAMES CLEM, No. CIV S-05-2129-RRB-CMK-P

Plaintiff, 

vs. ORDER

G. LOMELI,

Defendant.

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pending

before the Court is a motion for reconsideration of the Magistrate

Judge’s June 8, 2006, Order denying appointment of counsel.

Pursuant to Eastern District of California Local Rule 72-

303(f), a Magistrate Judge’s order shall be upheld unless “clearly

erroneous or contrary to law.” Upon review of the entire file, the

Court finds that it does not appear that the Magistrate Judge’s

ruling was clearly erroneous or contrary to law. Moreover, the

motion for reconsideration is untimely in that it was filed on

Case 2:05-cv-02129-JAM-CMK Document 28 Filed 06/15/07 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

April 5, 2007, a date more than 10 days after the June 8, 2006,

order. See Local Rule 72-303(b). The June 8, 2006, order is,

therefore, affirmed. 

 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. 26) is denied;

and

2. The Magistrate Judge’s June 8, 2006, Order is

AFFIRMED.

ENTERED this 14th day of June, 2007.

S/RALPH R. BEISTLINE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-02129-JAM-CMK Document 28 Filed 06/15/07 Page 2 of 2