Rowen

Rowen v. Prasifka

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaAugust 29, 20244:23-cv-02806California862 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ROBERT ROWEN, Case No. 23-cv-02806-DMR

Plaintiff, ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION v. FOR CLARIFICATION

WILLIAM PRASIFKA, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 66 Defendants.

On June 28, 2024, the court granted Defendants’ motion to dismiss self-represented Plaintiff Robert Rowen’s first amended complaint (“FAC”) challenging the suspension and revocation of his medical license. [Docket No. 63 (June 28, 2024 Order).] The court granted Plaintiff one “final opportunity” to amend his complaint and ordered Plaintiff to file any amended complaint by July 29, 2024, noting, “Plaintiff shall plead his best case.” Id. at 15-16 (emphasis removed).1 On July 29, 2024, Plaintiff filed a “motion for clarification” in which he describes four claimed “ambiguities” in the June 28, 2024 Order. [Docket No. 66.] Plaintiff cites Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 60(a), 60(b), and 72(b)(3) as authority for the relief he seeks. Mot. 2. …

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.