Opinion
1:22-cv-01304-JLT-SAB
06-05-2023
WILLIAM J. GRADFORD, Plaintiff, v. ANDY GRAY, Defendants.
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO PROCEED AS MOOT (ECF NO. 25)
Plaintiff William J. Gradford, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed this action on October 13, 2022, against Defendant Officer Gray of the Stanislaus County Probation Department. On April 21, 2023, the Court authorized service of the complaint in this action, and forwarded Plaintiff service documents for Plaintiff to complete and return. (ECF No. 17.) On May 19, 2023, the Court directed service on Defendant. (ECF No. 23.) Pursuant to the executed waiver of service, Defendant's response to the complaint is currently due on July 21, 2023. (ECF No. 24.)
On June 1, 2023, Plaintiff filed a “motion to proceed,” in which Plaintiff requests that this case not be dismissed, but that the litigation continue to proceed. (ECF No. 25.) Again, as Defendant's response to the complaint is pending, the matter continues to proceed. Accordingly, the instant “motion” shall be denied as moot. The Court notes the instant “motion” is very similar to a number of other prior filings by Plaintiff indicating his desire to keep this case open, and seeking other, sometimes unclear relief. The Court acknowledges Plaintiff may have pending cases in this District, some of which he has voluntarily dismissed; this case, however, is not one of them. Plaintiff is advised to keep track of the status of his various litigations so as to avoid further unnecessarily filings with the Court. Finally, as the Court previously advised Plaintiff (see ECF No. 23 at 1 n.1), any further filings that, as here, are not authorized by the Court or Local Rules, or otherwise appear unnecessary, shall be disregarded.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's “motion to proceed” (ECF No. 25) is DENIED as MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED.