Baker v. State of Colorado, The et al

Filing 33

MINUTE ORDER denying without prejudice 30 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment Combined With Response to Defendant's Motions. By Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 12/21/11.(mnfsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 11-cv-02578-PAB-KLM BRANDON BAKER, Rev., Plaintiff, v. THE STATE OF COLORADO, and JOHN SUTHERS, Attorney General, Defendants. _____________________________________________________________________ MINUTE ORDER _____________________________________________________________________ ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment Combined With Response to Defendant’s Motions [Docket No. 30; Filed December 19, 2011] (the “Motion”). As an initial matter, pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1.C., “[a] motion shall not be included in a response or reply to the original motion. A motion shall be made in a separate paper.”1 Plaintiff’s Motion impermissibly combines his own request for summary judgment along with his responses to Defendants’ Motion for Default Judgment [#25] and Motion for Leave to File Excess Pages [#26]. See Nielson v. Price, 17 F.3d 1276, 1277 (10th Cir. 1994) (stating that pro se litigants must follow the same procedural rules that govern other litigants). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Dated: December 21, 2011 1 A copy of the Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court for the District of Colorado may be found at: http://www.cod.uscourts.gov/LocalRules/Rules.aspx.