Maxton v. USA et al

Filing 153

ORDER Granting 150 Plaintiffs Motion to Reopen the Above Case for Just Cause. The parties shall file a status report as to where the case stands by Wednesday, September 2, 2015, by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 8/20/2015.(evana, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
OR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Senior Judge Wiley Y. Daniel
Civil Action No. 12-cv-00383-WYD-NYW
THERON JOHNNY MAXTON, # 85599-071,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA;
BOP DIRECTOR, Washington, D.C.;
T.K COZZA-RHODES, Warden F.C.I.;
CHARLES DANIEL, Warden F.C.I.;
S. COLLINS, Health Service, U.S.P.;
LT. ANTHONY, U.S.P. Florence,
Defendants.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s “Motion to Reopen the Above Case for

Just Cause” and Notice filed July 6, 2015. I note by way of background that this case
was stayed by Magistrate Judge Boland by Order of February 18, 2014, due to the
pendency of a criminal proceeding. He found that “the facts of this case overlap with
the facts of the criminal proceeding” and that “because the plaintiff is proceeding pro se
in this action and has raised the issue of his mental competency to stand trial in his
criminal action, his ability to protect his Fifth Amendment rights is of particular concern.”
(ECF No. 120 at 4.) Plaintiff filed objections to that Order which I overruled by Order of
April 4, 2014.

-1-

On June 16, 2014, Magistrate Judge Boland filed a Recommendation of United
States Magistrate Judge in which he stated that “[i]t appears uncertain when the
plaintiff’s criminal case finally will be resolved.” (ECF No. 125 at 4.) Accordingly, he
found that administrative closure of the case was appropriate under D.C.COLO.LCivR
41.2. (Id.) This Recommendation was affirmed and adopted by me by Order of
October 10, 2014. The Order thus administratively closed the case, subject to being
reopened for good cause “which, in this case, means resolution of the criminal case in
state court.” (ECF No. 130 at 3.) I noted in the Order that the “Recommendation does
not dispose of any claim or defense; all of the [Plaintiff’s] current claims will remain
available to him when” the criminal case is resolved “and the case is reopened.” (Id.)
(quotation omitted).
Plaintiff indicates in his motion that the criminal trial has concluded, and states in
his “Notice” that he was sentenced in the criminal case on June 19, 2015. Defendants
did not file a response to Plaintiff’s motion; thus, I assume that Defendants do not
disagree with Plaintiff’s representations regarding the criminal trial and have no
objection to reopening the case. Since it appears that the criminal proceeding has now
been resolved, I find that Plaintiff has shown good cause for the reopening of the case.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Reopen the Above Case for Just Cause
(ECF No. 150) is GRANTED. The Clerk shall reopen the case. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file a status report as to where the
case stands by Wednesday, September 2, 2015.
-2-

Dated: August 20, 2015
BY THE COURT:
s/ Wiley Y. Daniel
Wiley Y. Daniel
Senior United States District Judge

-3-