Ullery

(PC) Turner v. Ullery

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaJune 6, 20242:22-cv-00002California579 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ANTHONY D.L. TURNER, No. 2:22-cv-0002 TLN CSK P Plaintiff, v. ORDER MICHAEL ULLERY, et al., Defendant. 16 On April 25, 2024, plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of the order denying appointment of counsel. (ECF No. 86.) The Court denies the motion as discussed below. Untimely Motion for Reconsideration Plaintiff did not identify what order he wants this Court to reconsider. The record reflects that the only motion for appointment of counsel was filed by plaintiff on November 23, 2022, and was denied on December 1, 2022. (ECF Nos. 48, 51.) Local Rule 303(b) states “rulings by Magistrate Judges . . . shall be final if no reconsideration thereof is sought from the Court within fourteen days . . . from the date of service of the ruling on the parties.” Id. Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of the assigned magistrate judge’s order of December 1, 2022, is therefore untimely and is denied. Renewed…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.