Stiger v. USA

Filing 35

ORDER denying 26 Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney on 03/06/2014. (rhm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
EASTERN DIVISION
THOMAS HAROLD STIGER
v.

PLAINTIFF
2:13CV00110-JTK

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEFENDANT
ORDER

By Order dated January 17, 2014, this Court granted Defendant’s Motion for Summary
Judgment and dismissed Plaintiff’s Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) complaint against it (Doc. Nos.
24, 25). The Court noted in its Memorandum and Order that Plaintiff failed to respond to the
Motion, despite having been granted two extensions (Doc. No. 24, p. 2).1 On January 27, 2014, the
Court received from Plaintiff a belated Response to the Summary Judgment Motion (Doc. No. 26).
By Order dated January 29, 2014, this Court indicated that Plaintiff’s belated Response to
Defendant’s Summary Judgment Motion (Doc. No. 26) would be construed as a Motion for
Reconsideration (Doc. No. 30). Defendants responded to the Motion (Doc. No. 31), and on
February 12, 2014, the Court directed Plaintiff to file a Reply within ten days, noting that failure to
reply would result in the denial of the Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. No. 32).
Plaintiff has not filed a Reply or otherwise corresponded with the Court. Therefore, the
Court finds that Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration (Doc. No. 26) is DENIED.

1

On November 20, 2013, the Court granted Plaintiff’s first Motion for Extension,
directing him to respond by December 14, 2013 (Doc. No. 12). On December 17, 2013, the
Court granted Plaintiff’s second Motion for Extension, directing him to respond by January 14,
2014 (Doc. No. 17). This last Order was returned as undeliverable, on December 31, 2013 (Doc.
No. 23).

IT IS SO ORDERED this 6th day of March, 2014.

______________________________________
JEROME T. KEARNEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE