Raimondo v. Armada, Village of et al

Filing 6

ORDER DISMISSING CASE Signed by District Judge George Caram Steeh. (MBea)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION

JOSEPH RAIMONDO,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 13-CV-14773
HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH

vs.
VILLAGE OF ARMADA, et al.,
Defendants.
_____________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL
On November 19, 2013, plaintiff Joseph Raimondo filed a six count pro se
complaint against the Village of Armada and numerous additional individuals and
entities. In December 2013, the court entered an order that required Mr. Raimondo to
file an amended complaint or face dismissal of this action. That order stated, in part:
While it appears that the whole of plaintiff’s complaint is subject to
dismissal for the reason that the claims have already been litigated or
because they are not actually claims but his very personal story about his
agitation with Armada and what happened to him there, the court notes
that the complaint in its current state is very hard to understand. The
complaint appears to name defendants who have not been subject to
plaintiff’s claims in the past. Therefore, the court will give plaintiff a chance
to plead new, distinct claims that have not already been litigated. These
claims must be set out in numbered Counts and contain only information
relevant to each claim.
Accordingly, plaintiff is hereby given 30 days from the date of this
order to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff is limited to 20 pages. In
those 20 pages, plaintiff may state only relevant background information
and claims that have not already been decided in the 01-71353 and 0271696 cases. Plaintiff may not include extraneous information about his
family, his background, political figures, his anger with the results of past
litigation, or any other such information that does not have to do with
actual claims he wishes to pursue in this court. If plaintiff files an
-1-

amended complaint that duplicates the claims made in the past cases, it
will be subject to dismissal.
Mr. Raimondo’s “request to reconsider order denying plaintiff’s motion to recuse
and response to the honorable courts kindness to offer opportunity to amend complaint”
was filed on January 22, 2014. In this rambling and train of thought document, Mr.
Raimondo first suggests that this court is not impartial, then fills the remainder of the six
pages with his general unhappiness about this court and his treatment here. To the
extent Mr. Raimondo is asking this court to “reconsider” its earlier denial of his motion
for recusal, that request is DENIED. Because Mr. Raimondo has not filed an amended
complaint in compliance with this court’s order of December 19, 2013, the matter is
hereby DISMISSED in its entirety and the case will be closed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 5, 2014
s/George Caram Steeh
GEORGE CARAM STEEH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
On February 6, 2014, a copy of this Order
was served upon Joseph Raimondo, P. O. Box 330,
Armada, MI 48006, by ordinary mail.
s/Barbara Radke
Deputy Clerk

-2-