Ramos v. USA

Filing 33

MINUTE ORDER denying 29 Motion for Reconsideration ; granting 30 Motion for Extension of Time, by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland on 12/16/11.(lsw, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 11-cv-01073-BNB LEONARDO RAMOS-HERNANDEZ, also known as LEONARDO RAMOS, and ALL PERSONS SIMILARY [sic] SITUATED, AND AS NEXT FRIEND OF ALL MALE ACTIVE DUTY SERVICEMEN IN THE U.S. NAVY Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ANDREW TOMBLEY, an individual, POINT OF ENTRY SUPERVISOR DOE, an individual, TWO UNKNOWN CUSTOMS AGENTS, individuals, DOES 1-50, individuals or corporations, DOES 1-50, individuals, POINT AGENT DOE, an individual, SECONDARY INSPECTION AGENT DOE, an individual, BIOMETRICS AGENT DOE, an individual, CHECKPOINT SUPERVISOR DOE, an individual, DOES 101-150, individuals, ROSA LOPEZ, an individual, RYAN STARKEY, an individual, SSAFO SUPERVISOR DOE, an individual, DOES 151-200, individuals, DOES 201-250, individuals, CDR VELEZ, an individual, CAPT[.] KEELLY, an individual, ABECS LOCKWOOD, an individual, KENNETH ROYALS, an individual, ALFREDO ZABALA JR., an individual, M. RAMOS, an individual, V. MARTÍNEZ, STONE, an individual, DOES 251-300, an individual, Defendants. MINUTE ORDER ORDER ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE BOYD N. BOLAND This matter is before the Court on the two motions filed by Plaintiff on December 12, 2011. Plaintiff’s “Motion Requesting Extension of Time to Comply With Order of November 10th 2011" (ECF No. 30) is GRANTED. Plaintiff will be allowed thirty (30) days from the date of this minute order in which to file a second and final amended complaint that complies with the directives of the November 10 order. Plaintiff’s “Motion to Reconsider Order of December 1st 2011" is DENIED. The Court already has addressed and will not revisit the issues addressed in the December 1 “Order Overruling Objection.” Dated: December 16, 2011

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?