United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division
MEMORANDUM OPINON AND ORDER
STEPHANIE K. BOWMAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
is a frequent filer in this Court, both of cases and of
numerous (and lengthy) handwritten single-spaced motions
within each of those cases, including this one. The undersigned
has filed a Report and Recommendation this same day that
addresses pending dispositive motions. This additional
Memorandum Opinion and Order addresses seven currently
pending non-dispositive motions, all but one of which has
been filed by Plaintiff.
Pending Non-Dispositive Motions
to Stay Discovery (Doc. 84) and Motion to Seek Denial of Stay
of Discovery (Doc. 87)
only non-dispositive motion filed by Defendants is a motion
seeking to stay all discovery until this Court's
resolution of a pending motion for judgment on the pleadings.
Discovery in this case was previously scheduled to conclude
on March 15, 2018, but does not appear to have been
completed. The undersigned will deny Defendants' motion
as moot in light of the R&R filed this day, which also
clarifies the limited claims on which discovery may proceed.
In order to expedite the resolution of this case and provide
both parties a full and fair opportunity to complete
discovery on those claims, this Order extends the existing
of filing any response in opposition to Defendants'
motion to stay discovery, Plaintiff filed a counter-motion
seeking an order denying the stay, as well as a
“combined request to submit an advisory to the
defendants to fully quash the apparent confusion of this
matter's purpose.” (Doc. 87). Plaintiff's
motion seeks denial of the stay to avoid undue delay, and
because he believes that Defendants' pending motion for
judgment on the pleadings is without merit. Plaintiff's
counter-motion also will be denied as moot.
to Supplement (Doc. 88) to Add To Respectfully Exhibited
Advisory Requested to Be Presented to Defendants To Shed
Light On Their Apparent Misinterpretation of this Good Faith
Litigation - Brief Narrative/Addition Attached
motion will be denied as largely redundant of Plaintiff's
motion to seek denial of the stay of discovery.
for Return of Documents (Doc. 92)
seeks a free copy of “the original Exhibits attached to
this prisoner affidavit herein, along with a copy of the
action docket for this case.” In the same motion,
Plaintiff requests a copy of the docket sheet for another one
of Plaintiff's cases. This motion will be denied because
in forma pauperis status does not entitle a litigant
to free copies.
for Entering New Evidence - Exhibits In Support of Relief of
Order on Basis of Danger and of Necessary Injunction Proved.
previously has been advised that this Court will not enter ad
hoc “evidence” in the record. The motion to enter
evidence is therefore denied. To the extent that Plaintiff
seeks reconsideration of this Court's prior denial of his
motion for injunctive relief, the motion is redundant and
addressed in the R&R filed this day.
for the U.S. Marshal to Serve the Defendant on The Class