Opinion
1:21-cv-01193-NE-HBK
12-20-2021
THOMAS K. MILLS, Plaintiff, v. Z. JONES and J. RIVERA, Defendants.
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS FOR MISCELLANEOUS RELIEF
(Doc. Nos. 38, 41, 42, 43)
HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Before the Court are the following motions filed by Plaintiff: request to enter exhibits to the record attaching a portion of plaintiff's grievance appeal (Doc. No. 38); request to enter caselaw with copy of case (Doc. No. 41); request to enter Government Claims Program result with copy of caselaw (Doc. No. 42); and request to enter grievances to show administrative remedies exhausted (Doc. No. 43). These motions follow numerous other motions Plaintiff filed in this action seeking similar relief. See November 12, 2021 Order referencing the Court's October 14 and 25, 2021 Orders and cautioning Plaintiff about filing repetitive, premature, and otherwise deficient motions. (Doc. Nos. 32, 29, 26). In these previous Orders, the Court instructed Plaintiff not to file piecemeal pleadings, explained that he would have the opportunity to include such documents in an appropriate pleading should defendants file a dispositive motion, and warned him that the Court would strike further motions. (Id.). Despite the Court's previous instructions and warnings, Plaintiff continues the same unacceptable pattern. The Court cannot discern for what purpose these documents are being filed as defendants have not yet responded to Plaintiff's amended complaint. To the extent discernable, it appears Plaintiff is attempting to file the subject documents preemptively in anticipation of a dispositive motion. Again, until defendants file a motion seeking dismissal of the action any such exhibits are not relevant and are premature at best. This Court does not act a repository for Plaintiff's documents. The Court will not accept any further similar motions and will strike them without further explanation having duly warned Plaintiff on several occasions that such filings are improper.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED:
Plaintiff's motions for miscellaneous relief (Doc. Nos. 38, 41, 42, 43) are DENIED.