Opinion
1:22-cv-01653-ADA-HBK (PC)
04-17-2023
ISRAEL MALDONADO RAMIREZ, Plaintiff, v. KHALE, et al., Defendant.
ORDER DENYING MOTIONS FOR MISCELLANEOUS RELIEF (Doc. Nos. 14. 15)
HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pending before the Court are two pro se motions filed by Plaintiff on March 9, 2023. (Doc. Nos. 14, 15). The motions fail to comport with the rules of procedure. The Court previously advised Plaintiff that all motions must “state with particularity the grounds for seeking the order; and state the relief sought.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 7(b(1)(B), (C). (See Doc. No. 11). The Court cannot discern for what purpose Plaintiff submitted the motions.
Plaintiff intersperse professions of “love” within his vague requests for pens and paper.
According, it is ORDERED:
Plaintiff's motions (Doc. Nos. 14, 15) are DENIED.