Opinion
No. 4:15CV1089 ERW
03-04-2016
KEITH E. BROWN EL, Plaintiff, v. MELVIN SKEEN, et al., Defendants
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on plaintiff's "motion for leave to file [either] written objections to this court's memorandum & order of 1/25/16 or, in the alternative, interlocutory appeal." The motion is denied.
On January 26, 2016, the Court reviewed plaintiff's amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) and dismissed defendant Terry Russell and plaintiff's RLUIPA claims. Plaintiff says that he wants to file objections to the Order more fully discussing the facts pertaining to his claims. Alternatively, he seeks leave to file an interlocutory appeal.
The Federal Rules do not provide for written "objections" containing further factual allegations to a court's Order dismissing claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). Therefore, in this respect, the motion is denied.
The Court may only authorize taking an interlocutory appeal if the "order [appealed from] involves a controlling question of law as to which there is substantial ground for difference of opinion and that an immediate appeal from the order may materially advance the ultimate termination of the litigation . . ." 28 U.S.C. § 1292(b). Such circumstances do not exist in this case. As a result, plaintiff's motion is denied.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's "motion for leave to file [either] written objections to this court's memorandum & order of 1/25/16 or, in the alternative, interlocutory appeal" [ECF No. 20] is DENIED.
So Ordered this 4th day of March, 2016.
/s/_________
E. RICHARD WEBBER
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE