Opinion
3:23-cv-00812-TEJ
01-04-2024
DAVID MEYERS, Plaintiff, v. MARTIN REIDINGER, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
THOMAS E. JOHNSTON, CHIEF JUDGE
THIS MATTER is before the Court sua sponte following a review of Plaintiff's Complaint [Doc. 1].
On December 18, 2023, the Court notified the Plaintiff that he should anticipate being subject to a pre-filing review system if he did not explain why such system should not be imposed on his future filings with this Court. [Doc. 4]. To date, Plaintiff has provided no such explanation.
Thus, for all the reasons set forth in the Court's prior Notice [Doc. 4], the Court will direct that all documents submitted by the Plaintiff in the future will be administratively pre-screened by the Court for content. Any proposed filings that are not made in good faith or which lack substance or merit will be returned to the Plaintiff without further explanation. Such a review system “will allow Plaintiff to have access to the Courts for his legitimate concerns, but will prevent him from usurping the Court's resources with his baseless submissions.” Vandyke v. Francis, No. 1:12-CV-128-RJC, 2012 WL 2576747, at *3 (W.D. N.C. July 3, 2012).
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that a pre-filing review system is hereby IMPOSED, and all documents submitted by the Plaintiff in the future, whether in this case or in any other action filed in this District, will be administratively pre-screened by the Court for content. Any proposed filings that are not made in good faith or which lack substance or merit will be returned to the Plaintiff without further explanation.
The Clerk is instructed to add this case to Plaintiff's Filer Status Report in CM-ECF and to close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.