Roth

(PC) Gipbsin v. Roth

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 18, 20202:18-cv-03164California1,430 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 CLARENCE A. GIPBSIN, No. 2:18-cv-03164-TLN-CKD Plaintiff, v. ORDER ROTH, et al., Defendants. 16 This matter is before the Court pursuant to Plaintiff Clarence A. Gipbsin’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion for Relief from Judgment, in which Plaintiff seeks reconsideration of the Court’s October 22, 2020 Order (ECF No. 77) denying Plaintiff’s Motions for Appointment of Counsel (ECF Nos. 67, 73) and granting Defendants R. Ehler, C. Hord, N. Kennedy, A.W. Meiers, Roth, Sabala, R. Spark, J. Stigelmeyer, and D. Tran’s (collectively, “Defendants”) Motion for an Order Revoking Plaintiff’s In Forma Pauperis Status (ECF No. 37). (ECF No. 78.) Defendants filed an Opposition. (ECF No. 83.) For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiff’s Motion is DENIED. /// /// /// /// /// I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Plaintiff, a California state prisoner proceeding pro se, initiated this civil rights action pursuant to 28…

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.