Kher v. Hickenlooper, et al

Filing 26

MINUTE ORDER denying #25 Motion to Compel the Court to Rule by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 1/20/16. The Clerk shall mail Plaintiff #22 Minute Order (mailed as ordered).(dkals, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 15-cv-01782-LTB
JIM KHER, Member of weZpeople Advocacy Group, also known as Mazen J. Kherdeen,
Plaintiff,
v.
JOHN HICKENLOOPER, Individually and as Governor of the State of Colorado,
COLORADO STATE GOVERNMENT EXECUTIVE BRANCH (“CSGEB”),
COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (“CDOC”),
RICK RAEMISCH, Individually and as Executive Director of CDOC,
WALT PESTERFIELD, Individually and as Director of Colorado Adult Parole,
ALISON MORGAN, Individually and as Deputy Director of Adult Parole,
CATHERINE ENGEL, Individually and as Director of Adult Parole Office,
JOHN BOGNER, Individually and as a Team Supervisor of Adult Parole,
JOEL CAMPBELL, Individually and as a Community Parole Officer,
JAN YUNKER, Individually and as a Community Re-Entry Specialist,
JAMES HANNAH, Individually and as Co-Owner of a Future and a Hope,
MARCIA HANNAH, Individually and as Co-Owner of a Future and a Hope,
A FUTURE AND A HOPE, J291113, LLC, a For Profit Limited Liability Company,
JOHN DOE 1-100,
Defendants

MINUTE ORDER
ORDER ENTERED BY JUDGE LEWIS T. BABCOCK
The Court has received Plaintiff’s Notice of Change of Address (ECF No. 24) and
Motion to Compel the Court to Rule (ECF No. 25), both of which were filed on January
19, 2016. In his Motion to Compel the Court to Rule, Plaintiff requests that the Court
rule on his “Emergency Ex Parte Motion to Vacate Dismissal Order for Cause. On [sic]
the Alternative a Motiobn [sic] to Reconsider Order” and his “Emergency Ex Parte
Supplement to Complaint (Original) Filed 8/18/15. On [sic] the Alternative Replacement
of Original Complaint.”
However, all of Plaintiff’s previous motions have been ruled on by the court.
Most recently, in a November 4, 2015 Minute Order (ECF No. 22), the Court denied
Plaintiff’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus ad prosequendum (ECF No. 17), Second
Motion to Vacate Dismissal Order for Cause or in the Alternative a Motion to Reconsider
1

Orders (ECF No. 18), and Motion to Add Newly Identified Defendants (ECF No. 19).
That Minute Order was sent to the Plaintiff, but was returned by the U.S. Mail as
Undeliverable. (ECF No. 23).
Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel the Court to Rule (ECF No. 25) is
DENIED. The Clerk of Court is instructed to mail a copy of this Minute Order as well as
a copy of the November 4, 2015 Minute Order (ECF No. 22) to Plaintiff at his new
address (see ECF No. 24).
Dated: January 20, 2016

2