CAM FERENBACH
ORDER
Before the court is plaintiff Robin M. Lee's "Motion Requesting All of the Below." (#29). No Opposition has been filed. Pending "Motion Requesting All of the Below"
Defendants Donald Trump and Trump Corporation have not been served, and plaintiff has until August 21, 2012, to provide proof of service of the summons and complaint. (#11).
Plaintiff Lee asserts in his motion that "President Obama extended [him] a ½ billion loan," but that he has "yet to call up U.S. Attorney to ask how [he would] go about it." (#29). Plaintiff also asserts that Mr. Trump has "offered [him] a $5 billion settlement," that he filed a motion of acceptance of the offer, and that he appealed this court's denial of the motion to the court of appeals. Id. Plaintiff states "are you now all lying to me," and "I need to ask you and your [unintelligible] Dept. if its no good please said [sic] it to me..." Id.
Parties may file motions requesting a court order. Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b). Local Rule 7-2(a) provides that "[a]ll motions, unless made during a hearing or trial, shall be in writing and served on all other parties who have appeared." All handwritten motions submitted to the court "shall be legible." Local Rule 10-1. The "failure of a moving party to file points and authorities in support of the motion shall constitute a consent to the denial of the motion." LR 7-2(d).
As an initial matter, many of plaintiff Lee's sentences are unintelligible due to plaintiff's handwriting. Upon review of plaintiff's motion, the court is unable to decipher what "court order" the plaintiff is requesting, and plaintiff has not provided the court with points and authorities in support of this motion. (#29). To receive relief from this court, plaintiff must legibly inform the court of what order he is requesting the court to enter, must file points and authorities in support thereof, and must properly serve the motion on any defendants that have appeared. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 7(b); LR 7-2(a) and (d), and 10-1. The court recognizes that plaintiff is proceeding pro se, but advises plaintiff that he is still required to familiarize himself with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as well as the Local Rules of this court. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520, 92 S. Ct. 584 (1972)(holding that pro se plaintiffs are held to a less stringent standard than those who are represented by counsel); Jacobsen v. Filler, 790 F.2d 1362, 1364-65 (9th Cir. 1986)(holding that pro se parties are not excused from following the rules and orders of the court). As the court is unable to determine what relief, if any, plaintiff is seeking, plaintiff's motion (#29) is denied. See LR 7-2(d).
Accordingly, and for good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff Robin M. Lee's "Motion Requesting All of the Below" (#29) is DENIED.
_______________
CAM FERENBACH
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE