From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mills v. Jones

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Oct 27, 2022
1:21-cv-01193-ADA-HBK (E.D. Cal. Oct. 27, 2022)

Opinion

1:21-cv-01193-ADA-HBK

10-27-2022

THOMAS K. MILLS, Plaintiff, v. Z. JONES and J. RIVERA, Defendants.


ORDER STRIKING PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS FOR MISCELLANEOUS RELIEF

(DOC. NOS. 138, 139, 141)

HELENA M. BARCH-KUCHTA, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pending before the Court are motions filed by Plaintiff requesting to enter oppositions and/or exhibits in response to Defendants' motion to dismiss the case for failure to exhaust administrative remedies filed respectively on September 23, 2022 and September 26, 2022. (Doc. Nos. 138, 139, 141). 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, 78, 97). In these previous Orders, the Court instructed Plaintiff not to file preemptive pleadings and explained he would have the opportunity to respond to any dispositive motions filed by Defendants. Despite the Court's previous instructions and warnings, Plaintiff continues the same unacceptable pattern and seeks to file pleadings preemptively in anticipation of an exhaustion-based motion for summary judgment. Defendants have not yet filed their exhaustion-based motion for summary judgment. Indeed, Defendant just recently sought, and were granted, an extension of time to file an exhaustion-based motion s for summary judgment. (Doc. Nos. 146, 147). Until Defendants file their exhaustion-based summary judgment motion, any opposition is premature at best. The Court has repeatedly warned Plaintiff about his eccentric pleading practice. The Court issues Plaintiff a final warning that if he insists in this practice, the Court will recommend that the district court dismiss this action as a final sanction for Plaintiffs failure to comply with this Court's orders and his flagrant and continued abuse of the judicial process.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

The Clerk of Court shall strike Plaintiff's miscellaneous motions (Doc. Nos. 138, 139, 141).


Summaries of

Mills v. Jones

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Oct 27, 2022
1:21-cv-01193-ADA-HBK (E.D. Cal. Oct. 27, 2022)
Case details for

Mills v. Jones

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS K. MILLS, Plaintiff, v. Z. JONES and J. RIVERA, Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Oct 27, 2022

Citations

1:21-cv-01193-ADA-HBK (E.D. Cal. Oct. 27, 2022)