Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:02CV-P164-M.
July 1, 2011
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
By Memorandum and Order entered May 26, 2011, the Court denied Petitioner's fourth motion pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for relief from this Court's November 13, 2003, Order dismissing his petition for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (DN 46). The Court warned Petitioner that if he persisted in his attempts to file redundant motions or other papers in this closed action, the Court shall order the Clerk to return future filings to Petitioner (DN 46).
Now before the Court is Petitioner's fifth motion for relief from this Court's November 13, 2003, Order of dismissal (DN 47). He specifically seeks relief from judgment under Rule 60(b)(3) and (b)(6). Petitioner raises arguments asserted in previously filed motions for relief from judgment, which the Court denied as being without merit. Finding no new basis upon which to grant the relief requested, IT IS ORDERED that the fifth motion for relief from judgment (DN 47) is DENIED.
The Court is satisfied that no jurists of reason would find its ruling debatable or wrong. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that a certificate of appealability is DENIED.
Finally, because Petitioner's present Rule 60(b) motion is frivolous and contains arguments raised in prior motions filed in this action, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED not to docket but to return any future motions or other papers sent to this Court by Petitioner for filing in this action.
Date: June 30, 2011