Wood v. County of Contra Costa

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ANDREA WOOD, et al., Case No. 19-cv-07597-MMC Plaintiffs, ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM v. JUDGMENT; DIRECTIONS TO CLERK OF COURT

COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, et al.,

Defendants.

On October 14, 2020, the Clerk of Court entered judgment on the Court's orders of dismissal as to all claims in plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint ("FAC"). Specifically, the Court (1) dismissed plaintiff Andrea Wood's ("Wood") claims without further leave to amend, for failure to a state a claim, and (2) dismissed plaintiff T.P.'s claims without prejudice, for the reason that he is a minor who is not represented by counsel. The Court is in receipt of Wood's "Motion for Relief from Final Judgment, Order of Proceeding," received January 4, 2021, by which Wood, proceeding pro se, seeks relief from the judgment for purposes of filing a Second Amended Complaint.1 "[O]nce judgment has been entered in a case, a motion to amend the complaint can be entertained only if the judgment is first reopened under a motion brought under Rule 59 or 60." Lindauer v. Rogers, 91 F.3d 1355, 1357 (9th Cir. 1996). In her motion, Wood seeks relief from the judgment under Rule 60. Wood fails, however, to identify any cognizable reason for granting relief from the judgment.

1 Although Wood has not submitted a proposed SAC, she has described, in the 1 Accordingly, Wood's motion for relief is hereby DENIED.

2 Lastly, as the motion is supported by 193 pages of documents, collectively titled || "Exhibits to Rule 60 Motion," that are replete with material not properly filed in the public record, see Fed. R. Civ. 5.2(a), and that the Court finds are properly filed under seal || without redaction, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 5.2(d), the Clerk of Court is hereby DIRECTED to || file said Exhibits under seal.

7 IT IS SO ORDERED.

9 || Dated: January 8, 2021 .

INE M. CHESNEY United States District Judge

©