From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

COX v. PALMER

United States District Court, D. Nevada
Feb 7, 2011
3:10-cv-00710-RCJ-RAM (D. Nev. Feb. 7, 2011)

Opinion

3:10-cv-00710-RCJ-RAM.

February 7, 2011


ORDER


On January 13, 2011, the court issued an Order denying plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis, because he has "three strikes" pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) (docket #3). On January 24, 2011 plaintiff filed motion to reconsider order (docket #4). Plaintiff's handwriting is extremely difficult to read, but to the extent that the court is able to discern the motion, plaintiff does not allege imminent danger of serious physical harm. Plaintiff's motion presents no basis whatsoever for the court to reconsider its Order.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff's motion to reconsider order (docket #4) is DENIED.

DATED: February 7, 2011.


Summaries of

COX v. PALMER

United States District Court, D. Nevada
Feb 7, 2011
3:10-cv-00710-RCJ-RAM (D. Nev. Feb. 7, 2011)
Case details for

COX v. PALMER

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL STEVE COX, #40295 Plaintiff, v. J. PALMER, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, D. Nevada

Date published: Feb 7, 2011

Citations

3:10-cv-00710-RCJ-RAM (D. Nev. Feb. 7, 2011)