From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wiideman v. McDaniel

United States District Court, D. Nevada
Dec 1, 2010
3:09-cv-0650-LRH-VPC (Lead Case), 3:09-cv-0718-LRH-RAM, 3:09-cv-0729-RCJ-VPC, 3:09-cv-0750-ECR-RAM (D. Nev. Dec. 1, 2010)

Opinion

3:09-cv-0650-LRH-VPC (Lead Case), 3:09-cv-0718-LRH-RAM, 3:09-cv-0729-RCJ-VPC, 3:09-cv-0750-ECR-RAM.

December 1, 2010


ORDER


Before the Court is plaintiff Randal Wiideman's Motion Pursuant to Rule 59(e)/60(b) to Vacate Dismissal (docket #30). This is plaintiff's second attempt to revive litigation attacking the policies and procedures employed by prison officials and staff. The Motion to Vacate Dismissal shall be denied for the reasons stated in the Court's previous orders (docket # 22) screening and dismissing the complaint, and (docket #29) denying the Motion to Vacate the Order and Judgment.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Motion Pursuant to Rule 59(e)/60(b) to Vacate Dismissal (docket #30) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no additional documents shall be accepted for filing in this dismissed action except any properly submitted Notice of Appeal, which appeal shall be considered by the Court to be taken in bad faith.

DATED this 30th day of November, 2010.


Summaries of

Wiideman v. McDaniel

United States District Court, D. Nevada
Dec 1, 2010
3:09-cv-0650-LRH-VPC (Lead Case), 3:09-cv-0718-LRH-RAM, 3:09-cv-0729-RCJ-VPC, 3:09-cv-0750-ECR-RAM (D. Nev. Dec. 1, 2010)
Case details for

Wiideman v. McDaniel

Case Details

Full title:RANDAL N. WIIDEMAN, Plaintiff, v. E.K. McDANIEL, et al., Defendants…

Court:United States District Court, D. Nevada

Date published: Dec 1, 2010

Citations

3:09-cv-0650-LRH-VPC (Lead Case), 3:09-cv-0718-LRH-RAM, 3:09-cv-0729-RCJ-VPC, 3:09-cv-0750-ECR-RAM (D. Nev. Dec. 1, 2010)