Johnson v. Adams

Filing 26

ORDER denying as moot 20 Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss; denying 21 and 22 Plaintiff's Motions to Compel. Signed by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray on 10/01/2012. (kcs)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION DWAYNE E. JOHNSON V. PLAINTIFF 5:12CV00131 DPM/JTR ED ADAMS, Captain, Brassell Detention Center DEFENDANT ORDER Plaintiff, Dwayne Johnson, is a pretrial detainee proceeding pro se in this § 1983 action. He has recently filed three nondispositive Motions, which the Court will address separately. I. Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff has filed a Motion seeking permission to dismiss or withdraw the Motion to Suppress and/or Compel that he filed on August 22, 2012. See docket entries #16 and #20. The Court previously denied Plaintiff’s Motion to Suppress and/or Compel on September 21, 2012. See docket entry #25. Thus, Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss is denied as moot. II. Plaintiff’s Motions to Compel Plaintiff had filed two Motions asking the Court to compel Defendants to produce a witness list and security camera footage. See docket entries #21 and #22. Defendant explains that Plaintiff has not sent him any discovery requests. See docket entry #24. Thus, it appears that Plaintiff is filing Motions with the Court before sending discovery requests directly to Defendant. As explained to Plaintiff in the September 21, 2012 Order, he must mail his discovery requests directly to Defendant, rather than filing them in the record. Thus, his Motions to Compel are denied. III. Conclusion IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT: 1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss (docket entry #20) is DENIED AS MOOT. 2. Plaintiff’s Motions to Compel (docket entries #21 and #22) are DENIED. Dated this 1st day of October, 2012. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE -2-

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?