Alston v. Mississippi Department of Transportation

Filing 63

ORDER withdrawing 54 Report and Recommendations.; finding as moot 59 Motion to Amend/Correct; finding as moot 61 Motion for Leave to File; granting 62 Motion to Amend/Correct.. Mr. Alston must separately file his proposed Second Amended Complaint within 3 business days of today. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jane M. Virden on 7/27/17. (ncb)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI GREENVILLE DIVISION JASON D ALSTON PLAINTIFF V. CAUSE NO. 4:16CV00236-DMB-JMV MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DEFENDANT ORDER ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND Before the court are three motions to amend [59, 61, and 62] filed by Jason Alston, the pro se plaintiff. By these motions, Mr. Alston essentially seeks an order for leave to file an amended complaint which drops all claims asserted in the Amended Complaint [21], save a retaliation claim related to a forty-hour suspension. By R&R [54] entered June 26, 2017, the undersigned made a recommendation to the district judge that defendant’s motion to dismiss [41] be granted with respect to all claims in the amended complaint, except the retaliation claim based upon the suspension. No party filed an objection to that R&R within the time provided for in that document. Instead, Mr. Alston has filed the instant motions to amend, the first and second of which are, hereby, deemed moot in light of the subsequent, amended filing [62]. Based on the foregoing, and finding that the amended motion for leave to amend [62] is well taken, it is ordered that the motion is GRANTED. Mr. Alston must separately file his proposed Second Amended Complaint within 3 business days of today. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the R&R [54], entered June 26, 2017, is hereby withdrawn as moot. This 27th day of July, 2017. /s/ Jane M. Virden U. S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE 2

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?