Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:16-cv-00105-TBR
03-30-2021
BRANDON R. BRUIN PLAINTIFF v. WHITE, et al. DEFENDANTS
cc: counsel Brandon R. Bruin, pro se 240651 Little Sandy Correctional Complex 505 Prison Connector Sandy Hook, Kentucky 41171
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
Before the Court is Brandon R. Bruin's Motion for Sanctions. [DN 167]. Defendants responded. [DN 168]. Bruin did not file a reply, but the time to do so has passed. Thus, the motion is ripe for adjudication. For the reasons stated below, the motion is DENIED.
I. Background
Bruin brought a motion for sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b) asking for sanctions against the defendants for failing to comply with the Court's order to complete and submit a pretrial memorandum. [DN 167 at 1]. Bruin sets out that the Court granted the defendants multiple extensions to file a pretrial memorandum, and they failed to do so by the August 5, 2020 deadline. Id. at 1-2. Defendants responded, arguing that Bruin's motion should be denied. [DN 168]. Defendants argue that because they timely filed a motion for summary judgment in lieu of a pretrial memorandum, as permitted by the Court, they did not fail to comply with any court order or run afoul of Rule 37(b). Id.
II. Discussion
The Court agrees with the defendants. Bruin's argument fails. The defendants Bruin moves against met their deadline to file dispositive motions OR a pretrial memorandum by August 5, 2020. [DN 162]. They filed a dispositive motion—a motion for summary judgment—on August 5, 2020. [DN 163]. Therefore, Bruin's motion is denied.
III. Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, the Motion for Sanctions, DN 167, is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/
Thomas B. Russell, Senior Judge
United States District Court
March 30, 2021 cc: counsel Brandon R. Bruin, pro se
240651
Little Sandy Correctional Complex
505 Prison Connector
Sandy Hook, Kentucky 41171