Filing 20

UNREPORTED ORDER: permitting the filing of various documents received by plaintiff; denying 14 Motion to add Judge Virginia Kendall as a defendant; and denying 16 Motion for injunction. Signed by Judge Victor J. Wolski. (ar) Copy to parties. Redocketed for Administrative Purposes Only.

Download PDF
OR!GItl|At lln tbt @nitpb $rtuter {.ourt of feberut @Isfins No. 15-1418C (Filed October 17, 2016) NOT FOR PUBLICATION * * ?k * * r. rk rr * * t< * Jr * * t< r. J< * * * r( tr * FILED ocT t 7 20t6 U,S. COUBT OF RON HADDAD. Jr.. Plaintifi FEDERAL CLAIMS * THE UNITED STATES. Defendant. * * * ** * * ** * * * *rk r. * * * * * * * * * ORDER The Clerk's offrce has received several documents submitted by plaintiff, which were not filed when received because they did not appear to be ofa type recognizable for filing under our rules. The first document, received on February 9, 2016, is styled a request for an "emergency extraordinary writ of pracipe." Upon review, it seems to be a motion to add Judge Virginia M. KendaII as a defendant in this case, and shall be filed as such. The motion is DENIED, as the United States is the only proper defendant in complaints filed in our court. See RCFC 10(a); see also Stephenson u. United States,58 Fed. Cl. 186, 190 (2003). The next two documents were received on February 12,2016. Each bears a title beginning with the words "emergency notice." One, dated January 23,2016, alleges that plaintiff was wrongly told that his monthly commissary spending limit had been reached, and that he was coerced by a prison official to sign two forms. This docurnent shall be fiIed as a status report. The other document, dated January 24,2016, appears to be a motion for an injunction, and shail be fiIed as such. Mister Haddad requests that this court prohibit the individuals who are named in his complaint from participating in his cases in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and the Seventh Circuit. Our court does not possess such power and accordingly the motion is DENIED. The fourth document, received on February 29,2016, is called an "order" by accompanied by attachments pertaining to plaintiff. It appears that this document, ofhis cases in other courts, is intended to inform this court of Mr. Haddad s contention that he has succeeded in theee other cases by default. The document some may be considered a status report and ehall be fiIed as such' The fifth document, received on April 15, 2016, is also styled a "notice." In this document, Mr. Haddad maintains that the defendants in two of his cases in the district court have defaulted. The document may be considered a status report and shall be filed as euch. IT IS SO OBDERED. -z-

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?