Kelso

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DURRELL ANTHONY PUCKETT, Case No. 1:23-cv-00054-HBK (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S

CONSTRUED MOTION FOR COURT

v. ASSISTANCE

BARAONA, T. CAMPBELL, (Doc. No. 118) HERNANDEZ and WHITE, 15 Defendants. 16 17 On January 8, 2025, Plaintiff filed a one-page pro se pleading titled “Summary Adjudication by Way of Agreed Statement of the Court Per Federal Rules of Civil Procedure . . . Question of Law Let the Record Reflect . . .” which the Clerk docketed as a “Motion for Summary Judgment.” (Doc. No. 118). The pleading consists of a rambling and unintelligible litany of disjointed words and phrases. Plaintiff is advised that any motions requesting relief must “state with particularity the grounds for seeking the order[,]” and “state the relief sought[,]” which Plaintiff’s pleading fails to do. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b). Plaintiff’s motion consists only of words strings, many of which are illegible. To the extent discernable,…