From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gradford v. Velasco

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jan 3, 2023
1:22-cv-01493-JLT-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2023)

Opinion

1:22-cv-01493-JLT-HBK (PC)

01-03-2023

WILLIAM J. GRADFORD, Plaintiff, v. F. VELASCO and T. WEBSTER, Defendants.


ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE

(DOC. NO. 8)

HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On December 27, 2022, Plaintiff filed a “Clerk's Notice” with the Court. (Doc. No. 8). Plaintiff states he is providing notice that he filed applications to proceed in forma pauperis. (Id.). Plaintiff as a pro se litigant is advised that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure dictate the appropriate type of pleadings, including how motions are to be filed with the court. Fed.R.Civ.P. 7(b). Notices addressed to the Clerk do not qualify as a motion or pleading and are otherwise are not proper. To the extent Plaintiff requests confirmation that his applications to proceed in forma pauperis were received, the Court confirms receipt of the duplicate applications. (See Doc. Nos. 4, 7). The Court will rule on the pending applications in due course.

Because the Notice serves no purpose and is otherwise an improper filing, the Court will direct the Clerk of Court to strike it from the docket.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

The Clerk of Court shall strike Plaintiff's improperly filed “Clerk's Notice” (Doc. No. 8) from the docket.


Summaries of

Gradford v. Velasco

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jan 3, 2023
1:22-cv-01493-JLT-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2023)
Case details for

Gradford v. Velasco

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM J. GRADFORD, Plaintiff, v. F. VELASCO and T. WEBSTER, Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jan 3, 2023

Citations

1:22-cv-01493-JLT-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jan. 3, 2023)