Anderson v. Furst et al
Filing
113
ORDER GRANTING Plaintiff's 111 MOTION TO EXTEND filed by Jerry Anderson., ( Dispositive Motion Cut-off reset to 11/1/2019)--Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
JERRY ANDERSON,
Plaintiff
v.
Case No. 2:17-12676
District Judge Victoria A. Roberts
Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti
COLTER FURST,
MICHAEL THOMAS, and
NATHAN ELLIS
Defendants.
___________________________________/
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO EXTEND THE
DISPOSITIVE MOTION DEADLINE (DE 111) AND EXTENDING THE
DISPOSITIVE MOTION DEADLINE TO NOVEMBER 1, 2019
Plaintiff, a state prisoner who is proceeding in forma pauperis, brings this
prisoner civil rights lawsuit against three defendants, Colter Furst, Michael
Thomas and Nathan Ellis, all Michigan State Police Troopers, alleging they
violated his rights under the Fourth Amendment by using excessive force during
his arrest on September 4, 2015. (DE 1.) He seeks injunctive and declaratory
relief, in addition to compensatory and punitive damages. (Id.) All Defendants
have been served and have filed their Answer. (DE 14.)
On July 22, 2019, Plaintiff filed the instant motion to extend the dispositive
motion deadline (DE 111), requesting expedited consideration as the current
dispositive motion deadline is August 1, 2019 (DE 107 at 4). Plaintiff contends
that he is still waiting on documents responsive to four subpoenas (and that he is
unclear as to whether these subpoenas have been served). (DE 111 at 5.) He
asserts that the requested documents “are important to and relevant to prove [his]
claims” and that “[i]t would be unfair to force [him] to file dispositive motions
without the evidence as he would be fighting with one arm behind his back.” (Id.)
Plaintiff also states that he is waiting for several objections to be ruled on by Judge
Roberts. (DE 111.) He requests a six month extension of the dispositive motion
deadline. (Id.) On July 29, 2019, Judge Roberts issued an order overruling
Plaintiff’s objections (DE 112), but Plaintiff still has not received anything in
response to the four subpoenas at issue, and it does not appear that those subpoenas
have been successfully served. Therefore, the Court Clerk will re-issue four
subpoenas identical to the subpoenas at ECF No. 80, Page IDs 403-418, but with a
return date of 21 days after the date of service of the subpoenas, and direct the
United States Marshals Service to serve those subpoenas by certified mail, return
receipt requested, forthwith on the persons/entities at the addresses listed on each
of the subpoenas. No further action will be required from the plaintiff in this
regard. Costs of service are waived.
Based on the above, Plaintiff’s motion to extend the dispositive motion
deadline is GRANTED and the deadline for filing dispositive motions shall be
2
extended to November 1, 2019, which should allow Plaintiff sufficient time to
receive and review any documents responsive to the subpoenas. No further
extensions will be granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: July 31, 2019
s/Anthony P. Patti
Anthony P. Patti
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?