Drevaleva v. Glazer
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:21-cv-00500
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Drevaleva v. Glazer, Judge Gilliam denied six motions after the case had closed, including a motion to reconsider dismissal with prejudice.
Tatyana Evgenievna Drevaleva and the defendants, including Joseph Glazer. The order closed the case, denied Drevaleva’s pending motions, and directed entry of judgment for the defendants.
What happened
Tatyana Evgenievna Drevaleva’s amended complaint had already been dismissed with prejudice, and the court said the case was closed.
Drevaleva then filed six motions. The court denied all six and said it would accept no further filings in the closed case.
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. also denied the first motion to the extent it sought reconsideration because Drevaleva had not made the required showing. The clerk was directed to enter judgment for the defendants.
The detailed version
- Drevaleva v. Glazer · No. 4:21-cv-00500
- Haywood Gilliam
- Apr. 11, 2022
Background
On March 14, 2022, the court dismissed Drevaleva’s amended complaint with prejudice. Drevaleva later filed six motions, identified by docket numbers 92, 93, 97, 99, 104, and 106.
Rulings
The court reemphasized that the case was closed and denied all pending motions. It directed the clerk to enter judgment in favor of the defendants consistent with the earlier dismissal order.
The court specifically stated that, to the extent Drevaleva’s first motion to vacate the dismissal order was a motion for reconsideration, it was denied because she had not made the showing required under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 59 or 60 or Civil Local Rule 7-9. The court also ordered that no further filings be accepted in the closed case and warned that noncompliance with its orders could result in revocation of Drevaleva’s electronic-filing privileges.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.