Robbins v. Universal Music Group et al

Filing 10

ORDER dismissing as moot 3 Motion for Summary Judgment; adopting 4 Report and Recommendations.; dismissing as moot 7 Motion for Hearing. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. As to any future civil actions sought to be commenced i n forma pauperis ("IFP") by Robbins, the Clerk shall receive the papers, open a single miscellaneous file for tracking purposes, and forward the papers to the presiding district judge in this case for a determination as to whether Robbins q ualifies for IFP status and whether he has stated a claim with any arguable merit. Only if the pleading alleges a plausible claim for relief will the Court allow it 'to be filed. IFP complaints that tail to pass muster under 28 U.S.C. § 191 5(e) will be dismissed without any further judicial action after 30 days from thedate the complaint is received by the Clerk, unless the Court orders otherwise. This automatic dismissal of insubstantial claims 'will reduce the burden of papermov ing and explanation-writing, conserving a little judicial time for litigants who deserve attention." Alexander v. United States, 121 F.3d 312, 315 (7th Cir. 1997). Thus, although the Court will read and consider any future IFP application and co mplaint that Robbins endeavors to file, it will not necessarily enter an order addressing the IFP application or complaint. If no order is forthcoming, then 30 days after the complaint's receipt the Clerk shall, without awaiting any further direction, notifyRobbins that his case has been dismissed without prejudicepursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). Signed by Judge William T. Moore, Jr on 1/13/15. (wwp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION

KELVIN J. ROBBINS,
Plaintiff
CASE NO. CV414-230
UNIVERSAL
UNIVERSAL
UNIVERSAL
UNIVERSAL

MUSIC GROUP,
REPUBLIC RECORDS,
MOTOWN RECORDS,
MOTOWN,

Defendants.

)
)
)
)
cW

ORDER

Before the Court is the Magistrate Judge's Repo1

and--

Recommendation (Doc. 4), to which objections have been
filed (Doc. 7; Doc. 8). After careful consideration,
however, the Court finds Robbins's objections to be without
merit. Robbins has overburdened this Court, and now
exhausted its patience, with a never-ending stream of
patently frivolous claims. Addressing his many nonsensical
pleadings is impairing the Court's ability to adjudicate
the legitimate claims of other litigants. It is time to
rein in this out-of-control serial filer. Accordingly, the
report and recommendation is ADOPTED as the Court's opinion
in this case and Robbins's complaint is hereby DISMISSED.
As a result, all other pending motions are

DISMISSED AS

MOOT. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close this case. As

recommended by the Magistrate Judge, the Court additionally
imposes the following restrictions upon Robbins:
1. As to any future civil actions sought to be
commenced in forma pauperis ("IFP") by Robbins, the Clerk
shall receive the papers, open a single miscellaneous file
for tracking purposes, and forward the papers to the
presiding district judge in this case for a determination
as to whether Robbins qualifies for IFP status and whether
he has stated a claim with any arguable merit. Only if the
pleading alleges a plausible claim for relief will the
Court allow it 'to be filed. IFP complaints that tail to
pass muster under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) will be dismissed
without any further judicial action after 30 days from the
date the complaint is received by the Clerk, unless the
Court orders otherwise. This automatic dismissal of
insubstantial claims 'will reduce the burden of papermoving and explanation-writing, conserving a little
judicial time for litigants who deserve attention."
Alexander v. United States, 121 F.3d 312, 315 (7th Cir.
1997). Thus, although the Court will read and consider any
future IFP application and complaint that Robbins endeavors
to file, it will not necessarily enter an order addressing
the IFP application or complaint. If no order is
forthcoming, then 30 days after the complaint's receipt the

2

Clerk shall, without awaiting any further direction, notify
Robbins that his case has been dismissed without prejudice
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e),
2. The Clerk shall not docket any further motions or
papers in a case automatically dismissed pursuant to this
directive except for a notice of appeal. Any papers other
than a notice of appeal shall be returned to Robbins
unfiled. If a notice of appeal is filed, the Clerk shall
forward a copy of the Court's ruling in this case, the
notice of appeal, and the dismissed complaint to the Court
of Appeals. Robbins shall remain responsible for appellate
filing fees or he may move this Court for IFP status on
appeal.
3. To ensure that all future Robbins pleadings are
properly consolidated for review,

the Clerk shall

personally advise each deputy clerk of the Court's ruling
in this case and develop a procedure for ensuring that all
future Robbins complaints are immediately assigned and
forwarded to the presiding district judge in this case,
regardless of which divisional clerk's office received and
docketed the papers.
4. Robbins may file a motion to modify or rescind the
imposition of these restrictions no earlier than two years
from the date of this Order.

3

S. These filing restrictions do not apply to any
criminal case in which Robbins is named as a defendant, or
to any proper application for a writ of habeas corpus.
6. A copy of this Order shall be forwarded to each
judicial officer in this District.
4'

SO ORDERED this /

day of January 2015.

WILLIAM T. MOORE, JRL.'
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

4