Faircloth v. Corrections Corporation of America et al

Filing 192

ORDER Denying 118 Motion to Strike; Denying as Moot 123 CCA Defendants Motion for Extension of Time To Respond To Plaintiff's Recent Motions; Denying as Moot 124 CDOC Defendants Motion for Extension of Time To Respond To Plaintiff's Recent Motions. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 3/24/2016. (cmira)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Action No. 14-cv-464-REB-KLM
JAMES FAIRCLOTH,
Plaintiff,
v.
CORRECTIONS CORPORATION OF AMERICA,
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,
RICK RAEMISCH,
DAVE HENNINGER,
Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER1

The matters before the court are: (1) the Motion To Strike Misnomer and To
Add Colorado Board of Parole [#118]2 filed May 20, 2015; (2) the CCA Defendants’
Motion for Extension of Time To Respond To Plaintiff’s Recent Motions [#123] filed
June 10, 2015; and (3) the CDOC Defendants’ Motion for Extension of Time To
Respond To Plaintiff’s Recent Motions [#124] filed June 10, 2015.
In the motion to strike, the plaintiff notes that he has referred to the Colorado
Division of Parole and Community Corrections in some of his filings. He notes in his
motion that the proper name is the Colorado Board of Parole. The court is aware that
references to the Colorado Division of Parole and Community Corrections are
references to the Colorado Board of Parole. The motion is denied.
In their motion for extension of time, the CCA defendants and the CDOC
defendants seek an extension of time to respond to two motions of the plaintiff pending
a determination of whether or not the plaintiff will be permitted to file an amended
complaint. The court has denied both motions filed by the plaintiff for which the CCA
defendants and the CDOC defendants seek an extension of time to file a response. No
1

This minute order is issued pursuant to the express authority of the Honorable Robert E.
Blackburn, United States District Judge for the District of Colorado.
2

“[#118]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a
specific paper by the court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this
convention throughout this order.

response to either motion is necessary. Therefore, the motions for extension of time are
denied as moot.
After reviewing the motion, the file, and the record, it is
ORDERED as follows:
1. That the Motion To Strike Misnomer and To Add Colorado Board of
Parole [#118] filed May 20, 2015, is denied;
2. That the CCA Defendants’ Motion for Extension of Time To Respond To
Plaintiff’s Recent Motions [#123] filed June 10, 2015, is denied as moot; and
3. That the CDOC Defendants’ Motion for Extension of Time To Respond To
Plaintiff’s Recent Motions [#124] filed June 10, 2015, is denied as moot.
Dated: March 24, 2016.

2