From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Randall v. Colo. State Patrol

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Mar 14, 2013
Civil Case No. 09-cv-02304-REB-BNB (D. Colo. Mar. 14, 2013)

Opinion

Civil Case No. 09-cv-02304-REB-BNB

03-14-2013

LOREN J. RANDALL, Plaintiff, v. THE COLORADO STATE PATROL, THE ARAPAHOE COUNTY SHERRIFF'S [sic] OFFICE, and THE ARAPAHOE HOUSE, Defendants.


Judge Robert E. Blackburn


ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REOPEN

Blackburn, J.

This matter is before me on the plaintiff's Motion To Administratively Reopen and Resume Case Following Tolling Period for Active Federal Service, Pursuant to the Service Member's Civil Relief Act (50 U.S.C. 422 and Notice of Change of Address [#15] filed April 6, 2012. A duplicate of this motion is docketed as [#16]. I deny the motion [#15] and deny the duplicate motion [#16] as superfluous.

"[#15]" is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific paper by the court's case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this convention throughout this order.

Previously, the plaintiff filed a motion asking that this case be closed administratively while he was deployed with the military. On June 29, 2011, I entered an order [#14] granting that motion. I closed this case administratively and ordered that "on or before January 20, 2012, the plaintiff may move to re-open this case on a showing of good cause to re-open." Order [#14], p. 3.

The plaintiff's present motion was filed more than two months after the deadline set in my June 29, 2011, order. Further, I note that on April 6, 2011, the same day the present motion was filed, the court sent mail to the plaintiff at his address of record. The address of record used by the court was the address provided by the plaintiff in his present motion. That mail was returned as undeliverable. See returned mail [#17]. This is further demonstration of the plaintiff's irregular and unreliable prosecution of this case. On these bases, I conclude that the plaintiff has not demonstrated good cause to re-open this case.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. That the plaintiff's Motion To Administratively Reopen and Resume Case Following Tolling Period for Active Federal Service, Pursuant to the Service Member's Civil Relief Act (50 U.S.C. 422 and Notice of Change of Address [#15] filed April 6, 2012, is DENIED;

2. That the duplicate of that motion, docketed as [#16], is DENIED as moot.

Dated March 14, 2013, at Denver, Colorado.

BY THE COURT:

____________________

Robert E. Blackburn

United States District Judge


Summaries of

Randall v. Colo. State Patrol

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Mar 14, 2013
Civil Case No. 09-cv-02304-REB-BNB (D. Colo. Mar. 14, 2013)
Case details for

Randall v. Colo. State Patrol

Case Details

Full title:LOREN J. RANDALL, Plaintiff, v. THE COLORADO STATE PATROL, THE ARAPAHOE…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Date published: Mar 14, 2013

Citations

Civil Case No. 09-cv-02304-REB-BNB (D. Colo. Mar. 14, 2013)