BUY™	SELL™	SHOP™
Downloaded From www.TextBookDiscrimination.com
SELL YOUR OWN TEMPLATES (help others get the justice that they deserve)
BUY™	SELL™	SHOP™

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA, JACKSONVILLE DIVISION

[plfName]	)	Case No (LT)
Plaintiff	)	[caseNo]
)
v.	)
)
[defName]	)
Defendant	)

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION

Plaintiff, [plfName], on this [d] day of [MMM] [YYYY], respectfully moves this Court to clarify [thatOrder] (entered on [thatDate]).

Table of Contents:

Context	2nd Page
Motion	3rd Page
Certificates	7th Page
Exhibits	8th Page

Background:	Court [committed an error/omission/etc]
Problem:	Court’s error will manifest an injustice
Request:	Court clarifies its previous decision

Rule 1 | Fed. R. Civ. P. | Scope and Purpose

“[These rules of civil procedure] should be construed, administered, and employed by the court and the parties to secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding.”

Rule 60(a) | Fed. R. Civ. P. | Corrections Based on Clerical...

“The court may correct a clerical mistake or a mistake arising from oversight or omission whenever one is found in a judgment, order, or other part of the record. The court may do so on motion or on its own, with or without notice.”

Burton v Johnson,975 F.2d 690 (10th Cir. 1992)

“A District Court is not limited under Rule 60(a) to the correction of clerical mistakes arising from oversight or omission. Rather, a district court may also invoke Rule 60(a) to resolve an ambiguity in its original order to more clearly reflect its contemporaneous intent and ensure that the court's purpose is fully implemented.”

Precedence

6:17-cv-01587-PGB-GJK	- USFLMD (1/8/19)

3:10-cr-00017-MMH-JRK	- USFLMD (7/24/20)

3:20-cv-00889-MMH-JRK	- USFLMD (9/3/21)

2:20-cv-00430-JLB-MRM	- USFLMD (11/10/21)

8:11-cv-00176-SCB-AEP	- USFLMD (12/6/21)

8:21-cv-01751-CEH-JSS	- USFLMD (11/14/22)

2:23-cv-00062-SPC-KCD	- USFLMD (3/15/23)

USFLMD recently granted motions for clarification

Abbreviations

{#XX}	-	Docket Entry XX
FS	-	Florida Statute
USFLMD	-	US District Court, Florida, Middle District

Preliminary Matters

This is not a motion for reconsideration (housed in Rules 59(e) and/or 60(b)).

Nor is this a motion for relief from judgment (housed in Rule 60(b)).

Moreover, this is neither a written objection (Rule 72)) nor a motion to vacate (Rule 60(b)).

Instead, this is only a motion seeking clarification on one aspect of That Order. Namely, That Order’s directives on Plaintiff’s FCRA charges.

Herein, Plaintiff merely asks whether That Order’s dismissal of Plaintiff’s FCRA charges was based on administrative timeliness.

MOTION

Pertinent History

[para001]

[para002]

[para003]

Analysis

[para004]

[para005]

[para006]

Application to the Instant Case

[para007]

[para008]

Nature of Relief Sought

Thus, Plaintiff asks this Honorable Court to [clarification needed].

[para009].

Argument in Support of Clarification

Given Defendant’s penchant for deceit (¶10 supra), Plaintiff expects the lingering ambiguity to lead to more of Defendant’s duplicity. Plus, clarification will impact a potential/reiterated appeal (please see Sartin v McNair, 756 F.3d 259 (4th Cir. 2014)).

Thankfully, Rule 60(a) Fed. R. Civ. P. bestows this Court with the power to clarify its original intent (highlights added):

“In sum, then, Rule 60(a) allows a court to clarify a judgment in order to correct a “failure to memorialize part of its decision,” to reflect the “necessary implications” of the original order, to “ensure that the court's purpose is fully implemented,” or to “permit enforcement.” We now hold that Rule 60(a) allows for clarification and explanation, consistent with the intent of the original judgment, even in the absence of ambiguity, if necessary for enforcement.”

Garamendi v. Henin, 683 F.3d 1069 (9th Cir. 2012)

Here, in the instant case, clarification will:

[benefit001];

[benefit002]; and

[benefit003]

Moreover, clarification will only take this Court a few minutes to provide.

In other words, clarification will help ‘secure a just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of this action’ (Rule 1 Fed. R. Civ. P.)

So, Plaintiff sees no equitable reason to withhold it.

Historically (and lastly), this court-of-equity has previously found these points to be persuasive factors for rendering clarification:

“The Court is persuaded by these cases and will apply the standards used for Rule 60(a) to [movant]’s motion [for clarification]”

Casequin v Cat 5, 2:18-cv-588 (USFLMD 10/12/21)

Here, Plaintiff merely asks this Court to be similarly persuaded (as it was in its Casequin decision – and many other decisions) en route to clarifying one important aspect of That Order.

CONFERRAL

On [confMth] [confDy], [confYr], [conferralStatement].

CONCLUSION

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully asks this tribunal to provide clarification on [thatOrder].

Dated this [D]th day of [MMM] [YYYY].

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ [plfName]

[plfName], Plaintiff

[plfAddy]

P: [plfPhn]

E: [plfEml]

W: TextBookDiscrimination.com

Get Booked Up on Justice!

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

I certify that the size and style of type used in this document is Times New Roman 14-point font (caption) and Century Schoolbook 13-point font (contents); thus complying with the font requirements of Local Rule 1.08.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this [D] day of [MMM] [YYYY], I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of Courts; which will send a notice of electronic filing to the attached service list.

/s/ [plfName]

Endnotes:

SERVICE LIST

[defAtt], Esquire ([barNum]) E: [defEml] P: [defPhn] (Respondent’s trial lawyers)

How-To Guide: (interactive)

TextBookDiscrimination.com/Guides/Motions/Clarification.html

BUY™	SELL™	SHOP™
Downloaded From www.TextBookDiscrimination.com
SELL YOUR OWN TEMPLATES (help others get the justice that they deserve)
BUY™	SELL™	SHOP™