Opinion
1:22-cv-01653-ADA-HBK (PC)
02-02-2023
ISRAEL MALDONADO RAMIREZ, Plaintiff, v. KHALE, et al., Defendant.
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR MISCELLANEOUS RELIEF (DOC. NO. 6)
HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's construed motion for miscellaneous relief filed January 12, 2023. (Doc. No. 6). Plaintiff, a prisoner, initiated this action by filing a pro se complaint on December 30, 2022. (Doc. No. 1). The motion is handwritten and mostly illegible and incomprehensible. This Court's Local Rules require all documents for filing to be legible. E.D. Ca. Local Rule 130(b).
To the extent discernable, Plaintiff refers to an affidavit of indigency and request to proceed in forma pauperis he submitted in this case. On February 1, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis on his Complaint. (Doc. No. 10). Thus, to the extent that Plaintiff advises he submitted his affidavit to the clerk for filing, the Court confirms it was received, docketed, and granted.
The Court otherwise declines to address the remainder of the motion, which makes vague references to judges who apparently made rulings in other cases filed by Plaintiff. Plaintiff is duly warned that the Court will tolerate any disparaging and/or adhominem attacks directed at any judge with this or any other court. Any further such filings may result in sanctions, including dismissal of the case. Plaintiff is advised that to the extent he requests any relief, it must be made by motion. Fed.R.Civ.P. 7(b)(1). Further, Plaintiff must “state with particularity the grounds for seeking the order; and state the relief sought.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 7(b(1)(B), (C). Because the Court cannot discern for what purpose Plaintiff submitted the construed motion, the Court will deny the motion. The Court will conduct a screening on Plaintiff's complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A in due course.
According, it is ORDERED:
Plaintiff's construed motion for miscellaneous relief (Doc. No. 6) is DENIED.