Opinion
No. CV-05-485-TUC-DCB.
December 13, 2005
ORDER
On August 3, 2005, Plaintiff filed this action in federal court. Her Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis was granted by the Court on August 17, 2005. On October 28, 2005, this Court entered an Order that stated the following:
Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice. Plaintiff shall have thirty (30) days from the filing date of this Order to file an amended complaint, clearly and concisely stating the claims for relief, and properly establishing this Court's subject matter jurisdiction. See, Rule 8(a), Fed.R.Civ.P. The amended complaint must be retyped or rewritten in its entirety on a Court-approved form and may not incorporate any part of the original complaint by reference. Any amended complaint submitted by Plaintiff should be clearly designated as an amended complaint on the face of the document. Plaintiff should take notice that if she fails to timely file an amended complaint, the complaint and this action will be dismissed with prejudice, without further notice to Plaintiff. Rule 41(b), Fed.R.Civ.P.
Since that Order was entered by the Court, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Reconsideration that was virtually incomprehensible and certainly did not, in and of itself, resolve the problem specifically addressed by the Court's Order dated October 28, 2005. That being the case, the Motion for Reconsideration was denied on November 9, 2005.
Since that date, Plaintiff has filed numerous motions, but none of them are coherent and none of them even attempt to specifically resolve the jurisdiction problem that resulted in the original dismissal of the action. The motions filed are considered by this Court to be needlessly abrasive and threatening. None of them legitimately attempt to comply with the Court's Order of October 28, 2005. Plaintiff is not an inexperienced litigant and was clearly offered the opportunity to amend pursuant to Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1261 (9th Cir. 1992).
"Sanction Against Tanis Duncan in Cash and by Expunging from Record Duncan's Flawed Motion for Dismissal of 05-485 and Attached Exhibit as an Attempt to Sneak Nonexistent Facts in Complete Disregard of the Underlying Procedural; Administrative Facts, Fact Findings and Legal Grounds through the Continual Use and Abuse of a State Court Default Judgment Despite Facts not in Evidence and After Repeated Failure to Remove such Judgment Despite Superior Information that State Court Non Served said Judgment was Declared Moot by Duncan Herself" (Doc. No. 44); "Offer of Proof From Court Why Trial by Jury Has Not Been Made Part of Court Record Pursuant to Rights under U.S. Constitution Seventh Amendment" (Doc. No. 45); and, "Open Letter to Chief Judge Arizona District Court to Report Violation by Judge Bury's Courtroom Deputy Ken? and Other Administrative Matters" (Doc. No. 54).
CV-02-495-TUC-WDB, CV-03-549-TUC-FRZ, CV-04-334-TUC-FRZ, CV-04-542-TUC-CKJ, CV-99-017-TUC-JMR.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that this action is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).