Shove v. McDonald, 14-cv-02903-JD. (2017)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20170809826
Visitors: 14
Filed: Aug. 08, 2017
Latest Update: Aug. 08, 2017
Summary: ORDER Re: Dkt. No. 67 JAMES DONATO , District Judge . This is a civil rights case brought pro se by a state prisoner. The Court granted defendants' motion to revoke plaintiff's in forma pauperis status. The case was dismissed and closed after plaintiff failed to pay the filing fee. On March 3, 2017, the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded in light of two recently decided cases that clarified what dismissals may constitute strikes. Docket No. 50. On March 15, 2017, plaintiff filed a petitio
Summary: ORDER Re: Dkt. No. 67 JAMES DONATO , District Judge . This is a civil rights case brought pro se by a state prisoner. The Court granted defendants' motion to revoke plaintiff's in forma pauperis status. The case was dismissed and closed after plaintiff failed to pay the filing fee. On March 3, 2017, the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded in light of two recently decided cases that clarified what dismissals may constitute strikes. Docket No. 50. On March 15, 2017, plaintiff filed a petition..
More
ORDER
Re: Dkt. No. 67
JAMES DONATO, District Judge.
This is a civil rights case brought pro se by a state prisoner. The Court granted defendants' motion to revoke plaintiff's in forma pauperis status. The case was dismissed and closed after plaintiff failed to pay the filing fee. On March 3, 2017, the Ninth Circuit reversed and remanded in light of two recently decided cases that clarified what dismissals may constitute strikes. Docket No. 50. On March 15, 2017, plaintiff filed a petitioner for rehearing en banc. At that time, the Ninth Circuit had not ruled on plaintiff's motion for rehearing and no mandate has been issued. However, defendants filed a second motion to dismiss and revoke plaintiffs in forma pauperis status. Docket No. 53. Because the mandate had not been issued and had been stayed in light of the motion for rehearing, this Court did not have jurisdiction to hear defendants' motion and it dismissed it without prejudice.
The Ninth Circuit denied plaintiff's motion for a hearing and issued the mandate on May 30, 2017. Defendants filed a new motion to revoke plaintiff's in forma pauperis status on June 16, 2017. Plaintiff has filed a new opposition and defendants filed a reply. The Court will review the filings in due course.
Plaintiff's motion to incorporate evidence (Docket No. 67) is DENIED as moot. The judgment in this case (Docket No. 42) is VACATED and this case is REOPENED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
