Bartholomew v. Finke, 18-cv-04590-CRB. (2019)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20190311563
Visitors: 11
Filed: Mar. 05, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 05, 2019
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TITLED EX PARTE APPLICATION SUBMITTING RULE 60(A) MOTION FOR CORRECTION OF CLERICAL MISTAKES IN THE WRITING OF THE COURT'S MARCH 1, 2019 ORDER CHARLES R. BREYER , District Judge . Pro se plaintiff Marilyn Ann Bartholomew has filed a motion titled Ex Parte Application Submitting Rule 60(a) Motion for Correction of Clerical Mistakes in the Writing of the Court's March 1, 2019 Order. Dkt. 45. She contends that her previous Motion, Dkt. 38, was before this Court under Feder
Summary: ORDER DENYING MOTION TITLED EX PARTE APPLICATION SUBMITTING RULE 60(A) MOTION FOR CORRECTION OF CLERICAL MISTAKES IN THE WRITING OF THE COURT'S MARCH 1, 2019 ORDER CHARLES R. BREYER , District Judge . Pro se plaintiff Marilyn Ann Bartholomew has filed a motion titled Ex Parte Application Submitting Rule 60(a) Motion for Correction of Clerical Mistakes in the Writing of the Court's March 1, 2019 Order. Dkt. 45. She contends that her previous Motion, Dkt. 38, was before this Court under Federa..
More
ORDER DENYING MOTION TITLED EX PARTE APPLICATION SUBMITTING RULE 60(A) MOTION FOR CORRECTION OF CLERICAL MISTAKES IN THE WRITING OF THE COURT'S MARCH 1, 2019 ORDER
CHARLES R. BREYER, District Judge.
Pro se plaintiff Marilyn Ann Bartholomew has filed a motion titled Ex Parte Application Submitting Rule 60(a) Motion for Correction of Clerical Mistakes in the Writing of the Court's March 1, 2019 Order. Dkt. 45. She contends that her previous Motion, Dkt. 38, was before this Court under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1), not Rule 60(b)(6). Id. at 1. But the Court in fact denied Plaintiff's previous Motion, which she titled Plaintiff's Notice of Motion and Motion for Relief from Order Granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, and for Relief from the Judgment (Dkt. 38), because it failed to warrant relief under Rule 60(b)(1). Order at 2. There is thus no basis for Plaintiff's present request.
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff's motion titled Ex Parte Application Submitting Rule 60(a) Motion for Correction of Clerical Mistakes in the Writing of the Court's March 1, 2019 Order is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
