Opinion
Civil No. 3:11CV812
01-27-2014
MONTE DECARLOS WINSTON v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
MEMORANDUM OPINION
By Memorandum Opinion and Order entered September 10, 2013, the Court dismissed Monte DeCarlos Winston's complaint pursuant to the Federal Torts Claim Act ("FTCA"), 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346, 2671-2689, with jurisdiction vested pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. On September 18, 2013 the Court received from Winston a "Motion Pursuant to Rule 60(a) and (b) of F.R.Civ.P." ("Rule 60 Motion," ECF No. 54 (capitalization corrected).) If Winston wishes to pursue relief under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b), "he must identify the specific subsection of the rule that governs his motion and brief why he is entitled to relief under that portion of Rule 60(b). Shanklin v. Seals, No. 3:07cv319, 2011 WL 2470119, at *1 (E.D. Va. June 21, 2011) (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted). To the extent Winston brings a motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(a), he fails to identify "a clerical mistake or a mistake arising from oversight or omission . . . in a judgment, order, or other part of the record." Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(a). Accordingly, Winston's Rule 60 Motion (ECF No. 54) will be denied without prejudice.
In support of his Rule 60(a) Motion, Winston suggests that the "Civil Action No. was entered under a Criminal Action No." and that "Consent by both parties was given to Magistrate Judge M. Hannah Lauck . . . ." (Rule 60 Mot. 1.) Winston is incorrect. The Memorandum Opinion and Order dismissing the action clearly assigns the action the civil number "3:11CV812" and only Winston consented to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate Judge. (See ECF No. 5.)
The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion to Winston and counsel for the United States.
__________
Robert E. Payne
Senior United States District Judge
Date: January 27, 2014
Richmond, Virginia