Griffith v. State of Colorado et al

Filing 27

MINUTE ORDER; 24 Motion to Withdraw Case is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff may file a new motion clarifying whether she wishes to dismiss the case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) or administratively close this case pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 41.2, by Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix on 3/16/15.(morti, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Civil Action No. 14-cv-03377-KLM
DARLENE GRIFFITH,
Plaintiff,
v.
STATE OF COLORADO,
RICK RAEMISH, in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as executive director
of the Colorado Department of Corrections,
ROGER WERHOLTZ, in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as executive
director of the Colorado Department of Corrections,
TONY CAROCHI, in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as executive director
of the Colorado Department of Corrections,
TOM CLEMENTS by the through his estate, in his individual capacity and in his official
capacity as executive director of the Colorado Department of Corrections,
ARISTEDES ZAVARIS, in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as executive
director of the Colorado Department of Corrections,
JOE ORTIZ, in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as executive director of the
Colorado Department of Corrections,
JOHN SUTHERS, in his individual capacity and in his official capacity as executive director
of the Colorado Department of Corrections,
Defendants.

MINUTE ORDER
ENTERED BY KRISTEN L. MIX, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Withdraw Case [#24]1 (the
“Motion”). The Motion states:
Plaintiff wishes to withdraw this case untill [sic] the case with David Lane is
finished with this court. It is the same case, involving the same person(s)[.]
Plaintiff has asked Mr. Lane several times to be in the class action but has
1

“[#24]” is an example of the convention the Court uses to identify the docket number
assigned to a specific paper by the Court’s case management and electronic case filing system
(CM/ECF). This convention is used throughout this Minute Order.

1

been denied. Plaintiff wishes to withdraw this case untill [sic] the case is
completed with Mr. Lane.
Motion [#24] at 1. It is unclear to the Court whether Plaintiff wishes to voluntarily dismiss
this case without prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) or wishes to
administratively close this case pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 41.2. Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion [#24] is DENIED without prejudice.
Plaintiff may file a new motion clarifying whether she wishes to dismiss the case pursuant
to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) or administratively close this case pursuant to
D.C.COLO.LCivR 41.2.
Dated: March 16, 2015

2