Opinion
CAUSE NO.: 2:14-CV-231-RL-PRC
04-27-2017
PAUL FLETCHER, Plaintiff, v. HOEPPNER WAGNER & EVANS, LLP and WAYNE GOLOMB, Defendants.
cc: Paul Fletcher, Plaintiff, pro se
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's Second Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendant Golomb's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 166], filed by pro se Plaintiff Paul Fletcher on April 3, 2017. Defendant Wayne Golomb filed a response on April 10, 2017, and Plaintiff filed a reply on April 20, 2017.
On January 9, 2017, Defendant Wayne Golomb filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. (ECF 137). A Notice to Pro Se Litigant was sent to Plaintiff on January 19, 2017.
On February 13, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion requesting additional time to respond to the Motion for Summary Judgment pending a ruling on a motion that was pending at the time in which he requested that discovery be reopened. On February 16, 2017, the Court stayed the deadline for Plaintiff to respond to the Motion for Summary Judgment until the Court ruled on his pending motion to reopen discovery.
On March 8, 2017, the Court denied Plaintiff's request to reopen discovery and reset the deadline for Plaintiff to respond to the Motion for Summary Judgment to April 10, 2017. (ECF 160).
On March 27, 2017, Plaintiff filed an Objection to the Court's March 8, 2017 Order pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a).
On April 3, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Stay Proceedings, asking the Court to stay the proceedings in this case until a related case in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana is transferred to this district and consolidated with this matter.
On April 3, 2017, Plaintiff filed the instant motion, asking the Court to stay the deadline to respond to the Motion for Summary Judgment pending a ruling by the presiding judge on his March 27, 2017 Objection and pending a ruling on his April 3, 2017 Motion to Stay Proceedings.
On April 4, 2017, the Court took the instant motion under advisement and temporarily stayed the deadline for Plaintiff to respond to the Motion for Summary Judgment pending a ruling on the instant motion.
On April 25, 2017, Judge Rudy Lozano overruled Plaintiff's Objection to the March 8, 2017 Order. On April 26, 2017, the Court denied the Motion to Stay Proceedings.
Based on the foregoing, the Court hereby DENIES as moot Plaintiff's Second Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Defendant Golomb's Motion for Summary Judgment [DE 166].
The Court ORDERS that the deadline for Plaintiff to respond to Defendant Wayne Golomb's Motion for Summary Judgment is reset to May 26 , 2017 .
SO ORDERED this 27th day of April, 2017.
s/ Paul R. Cherry
MAGISTRATE JUDGE PAUL R. CHERRY
UNITED STATE DISTRICT COURT cc: Paul Fletcher, Plaintiff, pro se