Opinion
3:20-cv-07208-JD
05-20-2024
HOWARD HERSHIPS, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF CALIFORNIA SUPERIOR COURT, et al., Defendants.
ORDER RE MOTIONS
JAMES DONATO United States District Judge
Pro se plaintiff Howard Herships has filed two motions under Local Rule 7-11. Dkt. Nos. 89, 91. The first motion, which he also filed as a notice of related case under Local Rule 3-13, proposes to “bring [to] this Court's attention” a matter before Magistrate Judge Cousins, Chavez v. Santa Clara County, No. 15-cv-05277, which he says relates to his claims in this matter. Dkt. No. 89 at 5. A request to relate to a prior case is not properly addressed to this Court. The motion will be disregarded to the extent it presents arguments in opposition to Santa Clara County's motion to dismiss. That is not an appropriate use of this type of motion.
The second administrative motion was improperly styled as a motion to file under seal pursuant to Local Rule 79-5. Dkt. No. 91. In effect, Herships asks the Court to overrule a California State Bar disciplinary decision with respect to his former attorney, William Safford. Id. at 5. This is an entirely inappropriate motion and is denied. See Wharton v. Calderon, 127 F.3d 1201, 1206-07 (9th Cir. 1997).
The Court has afforded Herships considerable leeway in this case in light of his pro se status. That has resulted in a stream of unnecessary and at times frivolous filings. Herships is advised that further filings along the lines of the ones here will result in a revocation of his ECF filing privileges, and a pre-screening order for all filings. Herships is also advised that he must comply with the District's Local Rules and the Court's standing orders for all filings. Noncompliance will result in a termination of the motion without further consideration.
IT IS SO ORDERED.