Opinion
Civ. JKB-22-00566
09-11-2024
CHARLES HEAD Plaintiff, v. CAPTAIN R. RAKOWSKI, JR., et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
James K. Bredar United States District Judge
On September 3, 2024, the Court issued a Memorandum and Order in this matter granting Defendants' partial Dispositive Motion, construed as a motion to dismiss (ECF No. 59), and the Court dismissed Plaintiff's claims related to his alleged exposure to COVID-19 at FCI Cumberland. (ECF Nos. 65, 66.) In its Memorandum, the Court stated that Defendants' Motion was unopposed and that the time for Plaintiff to file a response under the Local Rules had passed. (ECF No. 65 at 2.) However, earlier that same day (but after the Court had already begun the process of arranging for the docketing of its Memorandum and Order), Plaintiff did in fact file a Response. (ECF No. 64.)
Under Local Rule 105.2, “all memoranda in opposition to a motion shall be filed within fourteen (14) days of the service of the motion,” unless otherwise ordered by the Court (and here there was no contrary order). Plaintiffs Response brief was untimely because Defendants filed their Dispositive Motion (ECF No. 59) on August 5, 2024, but Plaintiff did not file his Response until September 3, 2024, almost a month later. Plaintiff did not provide any explanation for the delay and, even if the Response were timely, the Court does not find Plaintiff's arguments in opposition to dismissal to be persuasive.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that, to the extent that Plaintiff's Response seeks any relief, such request is DENIED, and the Court's September 3, 2024, Order (ECF No. 66) remains UNCHANGED.