From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ramirez v. Newsome

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 29, 2022
1:21-cv-01389-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 29, 2022)

Opinion

1:21-cv-01389-HBK (PC)

06-29-2022

ISRAEL MALDONADO RAMIREZ, Plaintiff, v. GAVIN NEWSOME, GRAZA, ALVEREZ, Defendants.


ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR MISCELLANEOUS RELIEF

(Doc. No. 16)

HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff's motion to proceed with lawsuit. (Doc. No. 16). Plaintiff's motion is comprised of one incomplete sentence: “i [sic] have a federal motion to have federal relief for good duty of regard that i [sic] need for it to have so i [sic] can get it the claim of federal relief for due process of paperwork to come with everything I want done.” (Id.). The Court cannot discern what relief, if any, Plaintiff is seeking. The Rules require a motion to “state with particularity the grounds for seeking the order” and shall “state the relief sought.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 7(b)(1)(B), (C). The Court finds the motion deficient. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion for miscellaneous relief (Doc. No. 16) is DENIED.


Summaries of

Ramirez v. Newsome

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Jun 29, 2022
1:21-cv-01389-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 29, 2022)
Case details for

Ramirez v. Newsome

Case Details

Full title:ISRAEL MALDONADO RAMIREZ, Plaintiff, v. GAVIN NEWSOME, GRAZA, ALVEREZ…

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Jun 29, 2022

Citations

1:21-cv-01389-HBK (PC) (E.D. Cal. Jun. 29, 2022)