Anderson v. Hobbs et al
ORDER denying pltf's motions to amend his complaint 226 231 236 ; Anderson is prohibited from filing any further motions to amend or motions to supplement his complaint. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 7/31/12. (vjt)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
JAMES KEN ANDERSON,
NO. 5:11CV00258 JLH/BD
RAY HOBBS, et al.
James Ken Anderson, an Arkansas Department of Correction (“ADC”) inmate, filed this
action pro se alleging deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs and violations of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Despite the Court’s instruction to the contrary, Anderson has continued to file motions to
amend his complaint. Most recently, he has filed three motions to supplement his complaint, claiming
that he now suffers from cancer as a result of the defendants’ failure to treat his medical needs. Those
motions are DENIED. Documents #226, #231, and #236.
Anderson filed this lawsuit complaining that the defendants failed to provide him Hepatitis C
treatment and that they knowingly caused the insertion of a defective knee-replacement device. The
claims he now seeks to add are wholly unrelated to the claims in this lawsuit.
Anderson has been warned repeatedly not to file additional motions to amend his complaint.
To date, the Court has been lenient because Anderson is proceeding pro se; however, further waste
of judicial resources will not be tolerated. To that end, Anderson is prohibited from filing any further
motions to amend or motions to supplement his complaint. He may continue to pursue the claims
previously identified in this lawsuit, but no additional parties or claims will be added to this lawsuit.
The excessive number of irrelevant papers that Anderson has filed or attempted to file with
the Court has caused significant delay in the progress of this lawsuit. There is already a stop-docket
order in effect. If Anderson continues to file frivolous motions, the Court will enter an order
requiring him to show cause why this case should not be dismissed as a sanction under Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 11.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 31st day of July, 2012.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?