Maxwell

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SHAWN MAXWELL, Case No. 1:24-cv-00409 JLT CDB

12 Plaintiff, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION

TO ALTER OR AMEND JUDGMENT

13 v. PURSUANT TO FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 59(e) 14 LISA PACIONE, et al., (Docs. 77, 78, 79) 15 Defendants. 16 17 Shawn Maxwell, proceeding pro se, initiated this action with the filing of a complaint on 18 April 5, 2024. (Doc. 1.) 19 Following the Court’s grant of Defendants’ motions to dismiss Plaintiff’s original 20 complaint (see Docs. 48, 52), on July 11, 2025, the Court denied Plaintiff’s untimely, construed 21 motion for leave to file a first amended complaint and dismissed the action with prejudice. (Docs. 22 73, 74.) The Court found that granting Plaintiff leave to file the lodged amended complaint would 23 be futile given it failed to remedy the pleading deficiencies previously identified by the Court, 24 repeated claims barred by the Rooker-Feldman Doctrine and judicial immunity and failed to 25 adequately…