Wittmer v. E.I Dupont

Filing 45

ORDER denying 42 Motion to Transfer Venue. Signed by Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 12/02/15.(jhawk, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Philip A. Brimmer
Civil Action No. 14-cv-00091-PAB-BNB
NICOLE WITTMER,
Plaintiff,
v.
DUPONT,
Defendant.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s letter to the Court, filed on March 20,
2015, which the Court will construe as a motion to transfer venue [Docket No. 42].
On December 23, 2014, the Court overruled plaintiff’s objections and accepted
the magistrate judge’s recommendation that defendant E.I. du Pont de Nemours and
Company’s motion to dismiss [Docket No. 16] be granted and this case be dismissed in
its entirety. Docket No. 39 at 5. In the same order, the Court denied defendant’s
motion to transfer venue to Texas [Docket No. 19] as moot. Id. On December 29,
2014, the Court entered final judgment, awarded defendant its costs, and dismissed the
case. Docket No. 40. Plaintiff did not file a notice of appeal.1
In light of plaintiff’s pro se status, the Court construes plaintiff’s filings liberally.
See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972); Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1110
& n.3 (10th Cir. 1991).
1

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(A), the period of time
in which plaintiff was entitled to file an appeal expired on January 28, 2015.

Plaintiff states that she is now living and working in Borger, Texas and argues
that her case should be transferred to Texas. However, this case was closed more
than eleven months ago. Thus, there is no active case that could be transferred.
For the foregoing reasons, it is
ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to transfer venue [Docket No. 42] is DENIED.

DATED December 2, 2015.
BY THE COURT:

s/Philip A. Brimmer
PHILIP A. BRIMMER
United States District Judge

2