From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Collins v. Webster

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
Jun 27, 2012
No. 2:10-CV-172-JMS-WGH (S.D. Ind. Jun. 27, 2012)

Opinion

No. 2:10-CV-172-JMS-WGH

06-27-2012

BOBBY RAY COLLINS, Plaintiff, v. THOMAS WEBSTER, M.D., et al., Defendants.


Entry Concerning Selected Matters

The court, having considered the above action and the matters which are pending, makes the following rulings:

1. The plaintiff's filing entitled "plaintiff's motion pursuant to L.R. 5.1" [135] is denied. Local Rule 5-1 provides rules regarding the format of papers presented for filing and does not provide any authority for the relief the plaintiff seeks, that is "to take judicial intervention to either seal, or lock, or administrative order the Clerk to terminate the third claim of his First Amended Complaint under cause number 2:09-cv-247-WTL-TAB." Dkt. 135. The action just mentioned is closed. No change in the pleadings in that case can be brought about through a filing in this case.

2. The plaintiff's motion for reconsideration has been considered. A motion to reconsider is designed to correct manifest errors of law or fact or to present newly discovered evidence. Publishers Resource, Inc. v. Walker-Davis Publications, Inc., 762 F.2d 557, 561 (7th Cir. 1985). The plaintiff seeks reconsideration of the rulings in the April 4, 2012, Entry (dkt 129). The request for reconsideration [136] is denied, because the court made a correct ruling on the plaintiff's motion to strike and no persuasive basis for reconsidering that ruling has been shown. Any other relief thought to be sought in this motion is denied.

3. The plaintiff's motion for leave to file an amended pleading [137] is denied. It appears that the plaintiff seeks "permission for leave to file (reproduce) his Amended Motion to Strike." Such a step is unnecessary. First, a motion to strike is not a pleading as defined by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 7(a). Second, the plaintiff's apparent purpose in filing an amended motion to strike is to ultimately amend the pleadings in 2:09-cv-247-WTL-TAB. As stated in paragraph number 1 above, that action is closed and no change in the pleadings in that case can be brought about through a filing in this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________

Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, Judge

United States District Court

Southern District of Indiana

Distribution:

Jeffrey L. Hunter

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

jeff.hunter@usdoj.gov

Bobby Ray Collins

No. 27382-077

Lewisburg U.S. Penitentiary

Inmate Mail/Parcels

P.O. Box 1000

Lewisburg, PA 17837


Summaries of

Collins v. Webster

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
Jun 27, 2012
No. 2:10-CV-172-JMS-WGH (S.D. Ind. Jun. 27, 2012)
Case details for

Collins v. Webster

Case Details

Full title:BOBBY RAY COLLINS, Plaintiff, v. THOMAS WEBSTER, M.D., et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

Date published: Jun 27, 2012

Citations

No. 2:10-CV-172-JMS-WGH (S.D. Ind. Jun. 27, 2012)