Opinion
2:21-cv-00011-GMN-DJA
04-05-2022
Manetirony Clervrain, Plaintiff, v. Steve Sisolak, Defendant.
ORDER
DANIEL J. ALBREGTS,, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Before the Court is Plaintiff Manetirony Clervain's application to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 11). Attached to that application is a complaint (ECF No. 11-1), a motion for “manifest injustice” (ECF No. 11-2), a motion for “alien status” (ECF No. 11-3), a motion for “settlement” (ECF No. 11-4), a motion for “unreasonable classification act” (ECF No. 11-5), a motion for “congressional power and apex disposition concerns” (ECF No. 11-6), a motion for “common sense” (ECF No. 11-7), and a motion for “collateral attacks” (ECF No. 11-8). However, Plaintiff's case was dismissed with prejudice on February 25, 2021 for failure to state any cognizable claim. (ECF No. 5). To the extent Plaintiff is seeking to amend his complaint or raise new motions in this case, he may not do so. His case has been dismissed with prejudice and is closed. To the extent Plaintiff is seeking to open a new case, he cannot do so by putting an old case number on a new application to proceed in forma pauperis.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis is denied as moot.