Cobb v. Madlock et al
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER..IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to withdraw his motion to compel [#81] is DENIED as moot.IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs motion for extension [#89] is construed as a motion to file a sur-reply and is GRANTED in that he may file a sur-reply by January 25, 2021.. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 1/6/21. (MRS)
Case: 1:19-cv-00061-SNLJ Doc. #: 90 Filed: 01/06/21 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #: 686
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
TRACY MADLOCK, et al.,
Case No. 1:19-CV-61-SNLJ
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On December 2, 2020, this Court ordered defendants to either produce certain
withheld documents under seal to the Court, or file another memorandum explaining the
impact of the withheld documents on plaintiff’s case. Defendants have now both filed
the relevant documents under seal with the Court and filed a memorandum explaining
that the documents are not necessary to plaintiff’s case. For the reasons expressed in that
memorandum filed with the Court [#83], and upon review of the sealed documents [#84],
this Court agrees that the documents are not necessary to plaintiff’s prosecution of his
lawsuit such that counsel must be appointed. Some of the documents were in fact
produced to plaintiff with redactions, and the other documents are not material to his
Plaintiff has also filed a motion to withdraw his motion to compel [#81]. This
Court has already denied the motion, so the motion to withdraw is denied as moot.
Finally, this Court had extended the deadline for discovery and summary judgment
briefing pending resolution of the above issues. However, it appears that the summary
Case: 1:19-cv-00061-SNLJ Doc. #: 90 Filed: 01/06/21 Page: 2 of 2 PageID #: 687
judgment motions have been fully briefed, and there is no need for additional discovery.
Therefore, this Court need not issue further orders as to those issues.
Plaintiff has, however, filed a motion for an extension of time until January 25,
2021 by which to file a reply to the defendant’s reply in support of their motion for
summary judgment [#89]. He states that he has COVID-19. Plaintiff has already filed a
response to the motion for summary judgment, and he has no right to file a reply to
defendants’ reply (which is called a sur-reply). The motion will be will construed as a
motion to file a sur-reply. If plaintiff would like to file a sur-reply, he may file the surreply by January 25, 2021.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to withdraw his motion to
compel [#81] is DENIED as moot.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion for extension [#89] is
construed as a motion to file a sur-reply and is GRANTED in that he may file a sur-reply
by January 25, 2021.
6th day of January, 2021.
STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR.
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?