PAVAO v. MILES et al

Filing 158

ORDER ON THE MOTION IN RESPONSE TO THE DISMISSAL re 157 MOTION for Reconsideration re 153 Order Adopting Report and Recommendation filed by JOHN PAVAO. The motion is deemed a timely motion to alter or amend the judgment. No ruling on the motion will be entered before May 1, 2017. Signed by JUDGE ROBERT L HINKLE on 4/8/17. (kgc)

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PANAMA CITY DIVISION

JOHN PAVAO,
Plaintiff,
v.

CASE NO. 5:15cv68-RH/GRJ

SGT. MILES et al.,
Defendants.
_________________________/
ORDER ON THE MOTION IN
RESPONSE TO THE DISMISSAL
The order of March 27, 2017, ECF No. 153, noted that the plaintiff had not
filed objections to the report and recommendation and that the deadline for doing
so had passed. The order accepted the report and recommendation, granted the
defendants’ summary-judgment motion, and directed the clerk to enter judgment
for the defendants. The clerk entered judgment. ECF No. 154.
The plaintiff now has filed a motion “in response to” the dismissal. The
motion asserts that prior to the dismissal, and before the extended deadline for
objecting to the report and recommendation, the plaintiff delivered objections to
correctional authorities for mailing. The motion asserts that another copy of the
Case No. 5:15cv68-RH/GRJ

Page 2 of 3

objections was sent to the court with the motion. But no copy of any objections
was enclosed with the motion. The record still includes no objections to the report
and recommendation.
This order treats the motion to reconsider as a motion to alter or amend the
judgment and does not rule on the motion. This leaves open the time for the
plaintiff to submit a copy of the objections, if there really were any, or to submit
anything further in support of the motion to reconsider. I will continue on the
merits any argument the plaintiff properly tenders. But more than a year after the
defendants moved for summary judgment, the plaintiff still has submitted nothing
indicating the defendants are not entitled to summary judgment. If the plaintiff now
submits objections or anything further, I will consider them as may be appropriate,
taking into account the time of the filing.
This order does not extend any deadline or give leave to make any untimely
filing. But the appeal period will run from a ruling on the deemed motion to alter
or amend. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(4)(A)(iv).
For these reasons,
IT IS ORDERED:
The plaintiff’s motion, ECF No. 157, in response to the dismissal is deemed

Case No. 5:15cv68-RH/GRJ

Page 3 of 3

a timely motion to alter or amend the judgment. No ruling on the motion will be
entered before May 1, 2017.
SO ORDERED on April 8, 2017.
s/Robert L. Hinkle
United States District Judge

Case No. 5:15cv68-RH/GRJ