Free Motion for Miscellaneous Relief - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 Robert M. Cook (SBN 002628)
THE LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT M. COOK
2 Missouri Commons - Suite 185
1440 E. Missouri Avenue
3 Phoenix, Arizona 85014
Telephone: (602) 285-0288
4 Facsimile: (602) 285-0388
E-mail: [email protected]
5 Attomey for Plaintiff
6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
7
8 ROBERT A. CUEVAS, Case No: CIV 04-0476-PHX-PGR
9 VS. Plaintiff
I0 John Miranda, Former Chief of Police, City MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
x 11 of San Luis, Arizona; CITY OF SAN LUIS;
0 City of San Luis Police Department; Chief of
8 12 Police now Eddie Bej arano with the City of
g 3 San Luis Police Department; Alex Ruiz, City
E E g 13 Administrator for the City of San Luis,
g '§, gg Arizona; Arizona; and DEPARTMENT OF
O ‘? 9) 4 HOMELAND SECURITY; and John A.
ff ggé 14 Schwamm, Sr., then acting Port Director, -
0 $5 E Q 15 now Assistant Customs Director for United
$ g 5 E States Customs Service in San Luis, Arizona;
E E § 5 16 United States Customs Service; Michael
(M5 §“§ Freeman, Port Director for United States
; Q 17 Customs Service in San Luis, Arizona;
5 Robert Schroeder, Administrative Supervisor
Lu 18 for United States Customs Service in San
{E Luis, Arizona, Department of Homeland
19 Security - Division U.S. Customs and Border
Protection in Tucson, Arizona; Donna De La
20 Torres, Director, Field Operations Arizona
Customs Management Center for the
21 Department of Homeland Security - Division
U.S. Customs and Border Protection in
22 Tucson, Arizona,
23 Defendants.
24
25 Plaintiff Robert A. Cuevas, by and through his undersigned attorney, hereby moves
26 this Court for clarification of its March 24, 2005 Order and Judgment, dismissing, for lack
27
28 Page -1-
ase 2:04—cv—00476—PGR Document 37 Filed 12/11/2006 Page 1 of 2

1 of jurisdiction, the Federal Defendants in this matter. This Motion is supported by the
2 attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities.
3 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
4 On March 24, 2005, this Court entered an Order and a Judgment dismissing for lack
5 of jurisdiction the Federal Defendants in this matter.1 The March 24, 2005, Order indicates
6 that it applies only to the Federal Defendants, however, the Judgment states that "[t]his
7 Complaint and action are hereby dismissed." Unfortunately, neither the Order nor the
8 Judgment address the San Luis Defendants; indeed, the San Luis Defendants were never
9 parties to the motion to dismiss leading to the Order and Judgment. In addition, the
10 Judgment lacks language from Rule 54(b), Fed. R. Civ. Proc., indicating that the judgment
5 11 may be treated as being final, though it fails to resolve all claims against all parties.
3 12 Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court to clarify each, its March 24, 2005, Order
E 3
EQ_§ 13 and the Judgment to reflect that neither applies to the San Luis Defendants, and allow
m£%g
Q 14 Plaintiff to proceed on his claims against the San Luis Defendants without further delay.
u. 0 E w _ '
§ 15 RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this l §/XL/day of December, 2006.
gggg 16 OF ROBERT M. COOK
0 59, E
3 5 17
5 B
§ 18 Robert McConnell Cook, Sr. ‘
" Attorneyfor Plczintf
19
OPY of the foregoing hand-delivered
20 his utf day of December, 2006 to:
21 ames C. Hair, Jr., Esq.
.S. District Atty’s Office
22 wo Renaissance Square
0 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1200
23 hoenix, AZ 85004-4408
eleph e: 6 -514-7500
24 q
Y? ' A
25
26
I Yuma County and other panies were dismissed previously. Also, an appeal is currently pending as to the
27 nstant Order and Judgment.
28 Page -2-
ase 2:04—cv—00476—PGR Document 37 Filed 12/11/2006 Page 2 of 2

Case 2:04-cv-00476-PGR

Document 37

Filed 12/11/2006

Page 1 of 2

Case 2:04-cv-00476-PGR

Document 37

Filed 12/11/2006

Page 2 of 2