Opinion
Civil Action No. 05-cv-02033-WYD-CBS.
March 27, 2006
ORDER
This civil action comes before the court on Jackson's "Motion for Court Order" (filed March 23, 2006) (doc. # 41). Pursuant to the Order of Reference dated October 27, 2005 (doc. # 3) and the memorandum dated March 23, 2006 (doc # 42), this matter was referred to the Magistrate Judge.
Jackson is proceeding pro se in this civil action. On October 14, 2005, Jackson commenced this civil action by filing his "Emergency Petition to Review Unconstitutional State Rulings. . . ." (doc. # 1). Jackson alleges that state court orders regarding his dissolution of marriage have violated his constitutional rights. On March 21, 2006, the court issued an Amended Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (doc. # 39) that this civil action be dismissed with prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Jackson asks the court to order: (1) "use of home computer (2) order directing detention facility to allow additional time for Plaintiff to effect his appeal (3) court order directing detention facility to supply Plaintiff with enough paper and editing material i.e. correction ribbon for typewriter and erasers for handwritten request that Plaintiff be transported to public library for access to word processing 4-days weekly for a period of not less than 4 hours." Jackson further requests "court order to perfect motion, writs and other documents in facility room designated for attorneys and pro se party, . . . court order telephone calls to this court and U.S. Supreme court to perfect appeals," and "court order to direct detention facility to copy at Plaintiff expense all item Plaintiff deems necessary to perfect motions, writ and other legal documents."
First, the only named Defendant in this case is Jackson's ex-wife. Thus, the court does not have jurisdiction over the detention facility to make the orders that Jackson requests. Second, the court does not have the authority to override the policies or regulations of the detention facility. Third, Jackson's requests are too vague and generalized and not sufficiently specific for the court to address. Finally, the court will entertain any requests for extension of time based on Jackson's demonstrated limitations in completing legal filings. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Jackson's "Motion for Court Order" (filed March 23, 2006) (doc. # 41) is DENIED.