Mann v. Schlottman et al

Filing 56

ORDER Staying Certain Motions (ECF ## 39, 42, 52) and Enjoining Plaintiff from Making Any Additional Filings Without Approval of the Court. Signed by District Judge Matthew F. Leitman. (HMon)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
JACK MANN,
Plaintiff,

Case No. 15-cv-12869
Hon. Matthew F. Leitman

v.
SOE SCHLOTTMAN, et al.,
Defendants.
_________________________________/
ORDER STAYING CERTAIN MOTIONS (ECF ## 39, 42, 52) AND
ENJOINING PLAINTIFF FROM MAKING ANY ADDITIONAL
FILINGS WITHOUT APPROVAL OF THE COURT
Plaintiff Jack Mann (“Mann”) is an inmate currently in the custody of the
Federal Bureau of Prisons (the “BOP”). On August 7, 2015, Mann brought a pro
se action against Defendants. (See Complaint, ECF #1). On July 6, 2016, Mann
filed an Amended Complaint. (See Amended Complaint, ECF #31.)
There are two dispositive motions now pending before the Court. First, on
November 29, 2016, Mann filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. (See ECF #40.)
Second, on December 6, 2016, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss. (See ECF
#44.)

For the purpose of docket efficiency, the Court concludes that these

dispositive motions must be addressed and ruled upon before any additional steps
are taken in this action.

1

Despite the pendency of the dispositive motions, Mann continues to file
additional motions. In addition to his Motion for Summary Judgment, Mann has
filed three motions: (1) a “Motion for Judgment on the Merits of the Case; or in the
Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment or Motion for Court Annexed
Arbitration” (ECF #39); (2) a “Motion for Depositions in Person; or in the
Alternative, Depositions via Video Web Scenario; or in the Alternative,
Depositions via Telephonic Conference; or in the Alternative for Written
Interrogatories of Each Defendant” (ECF #42); and (3) a “Motion to Compel
Alternative Resolution Through and by Local Rule 16.3 Alternative Dispute
Resolution” (ECF #52). All proceedings on these motions are STAYED pending
further order of the Court.
Mann has also submitted a variety of other filings that are not authorized
under the governing rules. See, e.g., “Motion to Include Attached Affidavit as
Evidence for the Record of this Court,” (ECF #18), and “Motion for Evidence to
be Included on the Record Providing Proof the Defendants are Attempting to Derail Plaintiff Mann's Complaint and for Other Relief” (ECF #36).
To prevent any future improper filings that would unnecessarily complicate
the case’s docket and needlessly burden the Court and the Defendants, the Court
temporarily ENJOINS Mann from making any additional filings in this action
without prior approval of the Court. Until further order of the Court, the Clerk of
2

the Court shall not accept any filings by Mann without express permission of the
Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Matthew F. Leitman
MATTHEW F. LEITMAN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: January 19, 2017

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties
and/or counsel of record on January 19, 2017, by electronic means and/or ordinary
mail.
s/Holly A. Monda
Case Manager
[phone]

3