Davis v. Hobbs et al

Filing 48

ORDER denying 44 Motion to Amend. Unopposed recommendation 43 adopted. 36 Motion for Preliminary Injunction is denied. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 7/31/2014. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
RICHARD ALAN DAVIS
ADC # 89568

v.

PLAINTIFF

No. 5:13-cv-351-DPM-JJV

CURTIS MEINZER, Deputy
Warden, Varner, ADC

DEFENDANT
ORDER

1. Davis sued some prison officials for allegedly retaliating against him

for filing a § 1983 claim. NQ 4. He moves, opposed, to supplement his
complaint to add some new defendants and a claim that some officials
retaliated against him for filing grievances. The motion to amend, NQ 44, is
denied. Dispositive motions are due in a month; the new claims are unrelated
to the original claims, so more discovery would be needed and the Scheduling
Order would be derailed. There's also, as Meinzer points out, an exhaustion
tangle as to the new claims.
2. Unopposedrecommendation,Ng43,adopted. FED.R.CIV.P. 72(b)(3).

Motion for preliminary injunction, NQ 36, denied.

So Ordered.

D.P. Marshall Jr.
(/
United States District Judge

-2-