Sandles v. Chastang et al

Filing 8

ORDER denying 7 Motion to Stay Proceedings Regarding Companion Case. Signed by District Judge Robert H. Cleland. (LWag)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

JOHN ERIC SANDLES,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 12-11721

RITA CHASTANG, et al.,
Defendants.
/
ORDER DENYING “MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS
REGARDING COMPANION CASE . . .”
Before the court is pro se Plaintiff John Sandles’ “Motion to Stay Proceedings
Regarding Companion Case . . . ,“ in which Plaintiff apparently requests that the
reassignment of Sandles v. Batista, No. 12-11773 (E.D. Mich.), to the undersigned as a
companion be stayed until the court adjudicates his pending motion to remand. The
court has reviewed the motion and finds that neither a hearing nor further briefing is
necessary. See E.D. Mich. LR 7.1(f)(2). The motion will be denied.
Characteristic of Plaintiff’s filings in other cases pending in this district and the
dozens of civil actions he has initiated in the federal courts in past two decades,
Plaintiff’s motion requesting a stay is nearly inscrutable. As best as the court can
decipher, Plaintiff seeks an order staying the reassignment of Sandles v. Batista, a case
that was reassigned on April 25, 2012. There is no mechanism under the Local Rules
by which a litigant may prevent or undo a valid reassignment. The decision to reassign
a case as a companion is left to the sound determination of the relevant judges: “When
it becomes apparent to the Judge to whom a case is assigned and to a Judge having an

earlier case number that two cases are companion cases, upon consent of the Judge
having the earlier case number, the Judge shall sign an order reassigning the case to
the Judge having the earlier case number.” E.D. Mich. LR 83.(7)(D). Thus, Plaintiff has
no basis on which to seek a stay of the reassignment. Moreover, the reassignment was
consummated on April 25, 2012, nearly a month before Plaintiff filed a motion to
ostensibly stay the reassignment. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s “Motion to stay Proceedings Regarding
Companion Case . . .” [Dkt. # 7] is DENIED.

s/Robert H. Cleland
ROBERT H. CLELAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: May 23, 2012
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record
on this date, May 23, 2012, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
s/Lisa Wagner
Case Manager and Deputy Clerk
[phone]

S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C1 ORDERS\12-11721.SANDLES.Deny.Stay.Companion.jrc.wpd

2