From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sexton v. Firetree, Inc.

United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Dec 12, 2008
CIVIL NO. 3:CV-08-0789 (M.D. Pa. Dec. 12, 2008)

Opinion

CIVIL NO. 3:CV-08-0789.

December 12, 2008


ORDER


THE BACKGROUND OF THIS ORDER IS AS FOLLOWS:

The plaintiff, Michael Sexton, is a pro se state prisoner who is attempting to bring a civil rights action against a variety of state individuals who have allegedly denied him disability benefits and transitional housing support upon his expected release from prison. Sexton is presently confined at at the Frackville State Correctional Institution ("SCI-Frackville") in Frackville, Pennsylvania. To date, although given repeated opportunities to do so, Sexton has not filed a proper complaint. Most recently, on December 2, 2008, the Court recently gave Sexton a second opportunity to file an amended complaint. (See Doc. 26).

Since opening this matter in April 2008, Sexton has filed a plethora of motions that the Court is precluded from addressing until our jurisdiction is confirmed by the review and acceptance of a proper complaint in this action. To that end, the Court will dismiss the pending motions without prejudice to Sexton to refile any or all of them once a proper complaint is filed. ACCORDINGLY, THIS 12th DAY OF DECEMBER, 2008, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:

1. Plaintiffs Motion for an Order (doc. 12) is dismissed without prejudice.
2. Plaintiffs Motion for an Order (doc. 22) is dismissed without prejudice.
3. Plaintiffs Motion for Order (doc. 28) is dismissed without prejudice.
4. Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (doc 29) is dismissed as moot as it is redundant. On June 17, 2008, this Court granted Plaintiffs previous motion to proceed in forma pauperis. See Doc. 10.

A civil action is commenced by filing a complaint with the Court. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 3. To date there is no standing complaint in this action.

Plaintiff is advised that pursuant to M.D. Pa. Local Rule 7.5 the Court may deem his various motions voluntarily withdrawn due to his failure to submit a brief in support of each motion. See M.D. Pa. Local Rule 7.5. Plaintiff is cautioned that this Court will deem any future motions unsupported by a timely brief, except those as permitted by Local Rule, to be withdrawn.


Summaries of

Sexton v. Firetree, Inc.

United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Dec 12, 2008
CIVIL NO. 3:CV-08-0789 (M.D. Pa. Dec. 12, 2008)
Case details for

Sexton v. Firetree, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL E. SEXTON, Plaintiff v. FIRETREE, INC. (PENN-CAPP), et al.…

Court:United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

Date published: Dec 12, 2008

Citations

CIVIL NO. 3:CV-08-0789 (M.D. Pa. Dec. 12, 2008)