(PC) Dunigan v. CDCR

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA | KEVIN DUNIGAN, No. 2:19-cv-2501 WBS AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 V. ORDER | CDCR, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 By order filed March 26, 2020, this action was dismissed, ECF No. 22, and judgment was | entered the same day, ECF No. 23. On June 3, 2021,! plaintiff filed an amended petition for writ | of error coram nobis. The motion is incomprehensible and fails to identify any grounds for relief.

20 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that petitioner’s amended motion for writ of | error coram nobis, ECF No. 37, is denied. Any further such motions shall be disregarded.

22 | Dated: June 22, 2021 / ‘ZL, . a / 23 th tenn Von Loh UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 25 Duni2501.850 ——— ' Since plaintiff is a prisoner proceeding pro se, he is afforded the benefit of the prison mailbox | rule. Houston v. Lack, 487 U.S. 266, 276 (1988).