From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

David v. Unknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 23, 2012
No. C 12-0062 LHK (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2012)

Opinion

No. C 12-0062 LHK (PR)

01-23-2012

DAVID M. DAVID, Plaintiff, v. UNKNOWN, Defendant.


INSTRUCTIONS TO THE CLERK

On January 12, 2012, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a Rule 60(b)(3) motion. In his motion, he requested that the motion be filed in his previously closed case, David v. Reno, No. 95-4388 TEH, as a motion to reconsider. It appears this motion to reconsider is erroneously filed in the wrong action. Thus, the Clerk shall file Plaintiff's Rule 60(b)(3) motion (docket no. 5) in David v. Reno, No. 95-4388 TEH, and strike it from the underlying case of David v. Unknown, No. 12-0062 LHK.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge


Summaries of

David v. Unknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 23, 2012
No. C 12-0062 LHK (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2012)
Case details for

David v. Unknown

Case Details

Full title:DAVID M. DAVID, Plaintiff, v. UNKNOWN, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 23, 2012

Citations

No. C 12-0062 LHK (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2012)