Opinion
2:24-cv-576-JLB-KCD
08-22-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. CALVIN ZASTROW, KENNETH SCOTT, CHESTER GALLAGHER, EVA ZASTROW and KATELYN SIMS, Defendants.
ORDER
Kyle C. Dudek, United States Magistrate Judge
Before the Court are two motions filed by pro se Defendant Kenneth Scott. (Docs. 26, 28.) The first includes several discovery requests directed to the United States. (Doc. 26.) But Plaintiff need not file a motion for discovery, so his request is DENIED. See Jones v. Hayes, No. 119CV03997WMRCMS, 2021 WL 12188901, at *1 (N.D.Ga. Feb. 11, 2021). Discovery requests must be served on opposing counsel, not the Court. Furthermore, under this Court's local rules, discovery should not be filed unless the document is used at a hearing or trial, is necessary for a motion, or the Court orders otherwise. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d)(1)(A); Middle District Discovery Handbook (2021) at Section I.C.1.
The second motion is a request for additional time “to prepare for a Counter Lawsuit” and “to add additional Exhibits.” (Doc. 28.) Scott has already answered the amended complaint. (Doc. 13.) His request for more time will be GRANTED, and if Scott wishes to assert a counterclaim, or otherwise amend his answer, he must do so by September 23, 2024.
A couple final issues merit attention. Before filing motions, Scott must confer with opposing counsel and denote her (or his) position with respect to the relief sought. Any renewed motion must indicate in its Rule 3.01(g) certification the manner of conferral and any agreements reached. Failure to do so in the future may result in the motion being summarily denied. And Scott should refrain from including any fantastical allegations or rhetoric in his filings. See Hagans v. Lavine, 415 U.S. 528, 536-37 (1974) (“[F]ederal courts are without power to entertain claims ... if they are so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit, wholly insubstantial, [or] obviously frivolous.”).
ORDERED