Sykes v. Trost et al

Filing 6

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. No filing fee shall be assessed for this action. The CLERK is directed to file the Complaint (Doc. 1) and the Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 2) in Sykes v. Trost, et al., No. 16-cv-1241-SMY (S.D. Ill. November 17, 2016). Signed by Judge David R. Herndon on 12/21/2016. (tjk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EDDIE SYKES, # R22570,
Plaintiff,
–01350 DRH

vs.
DOCTOR TROST,
DOCTOR FUENTES,
NURSE PRACTITIONER MOLDENHOUER
NURSE SMITH,
NURSE WALTER,
NICOLE MORGAN
MISTY THOMPSON,
AMIE LANG,
WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES, INC.,
GAIL WALLS, and
DOCTOR SHEARING,
Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter comes before the Court for preliminary review of Plaintiff Eddie
Sykes’ Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A (Doc. 1). Plaintiff has also filed
a Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 2), Motion for Leave to Proceed In

Forma Pauperis (Doc. 3), and a Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. 4). After
carefully reviewing Plaintiff’s filings, it is evident that Plaintiff intended to file the
instant Complaint and Motion for Preliminary Injunction in a case previously
opened in this Court and presently pending before Judge Staci M. Yandle. See
1

Sykes v. Trost, et al., No. 16-cv-1241-SMY (S.D. Ill. November 17, 2016) (“Prior
Action”) (Doc. 1). In the Prior Action, the Court received 261 pages of exhibits.
(Prior Action, Doc. 4, Doc. 5). However, the Court did not receive a complaint.
On November 22, 2016, the Court informed Plaintiff it had not received a copy of
the complaint, which the law librarian sent via U.S. mail on November 10, 2016.
(Prior Action, Doc. 6). The Court directed Plaintiff, among other things, to file the
Complaint on or before December 16, 2016. Id. On December 15, 2016, Plaintiff
filed a Motion for Extension of Time in the Prior Action. (Prior Action, Doc. 7). 1
In his Motion for Extension of Time, Plaintiff indicates that on November 10,
2016, he filed a 63 page complaint and request for relief. Id. Additionally, he
states he filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction. Id. Although it is not entirely
clear from the Motion for Extension, it appears Plaintiff is not sure where his
pleadings are and is seeking additional time to resolve the matter. Id.
The Pleadings Plaintiff is describing appear to be the Complaint and Motion
for Preliminary Injunction filed in the instant case. 2 Having fully reviewed the
relevant pleadings in the instant action and the Prior Action, the Court concludes
the actions are duplicative of one another.

1

The same motion was filed in the instant action. (Doc. 4).

2

The instant Complaint includes a section that is entirely written by hand. (Doc. 1, pp. 15-78).
Plaintiff includes handwritten page numbers on this portion of his Complaint. Id. The Complaint
ends at Plaintiff’s handwritten page number 63 and a request for relief begins on Plaintiff’s
handwritten page number 64. (Doc. 1, pp. 78-79). The Complaint is dated November 10, 2016.
(Doc. 1, p. 1). Additionally, the Complaint appears to relate to matters asserted in the Prior
Action.

2

Accordingly, the CLERK is directed to CLOSE this case.

All pending

motions are hereby DENIED as MOOT. No filing fee shall be assessed for this
action. The CLERK is directed to file the Complaint (Doc. 1) and the Motion for
Preliminary Injunction (Doc. 2) in Sykes v. Trost, et al., No. 16-cv-1241-SMY (S.D.
Ill. November 17, 2016). The Motion for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
(Doc. 3) and the Motion for Extension of Time (Doc. 4) are duplicative of motions
already pending in the Prior Action and shall not be refiled.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Digitally signed by
Judge David R.
Herndon
Date: 2016.12.21
12:15:31 -06'00'
David. R. Herndon

3