Box v. Steele et al

Filing 70

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff's "motion under imminent danger" is DENIED. [Doc. 65] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not accept any additional motions or documents from plaintiff for filing in this action. All documents and motions mailed to the Court by plaintiff shall be returned as set forth in this Memorandum and Order. Signed by District Judge Charles A. Shaw on 5/29/2014. (NCL)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
KEITH BOX,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
TROY STEELE, et al.,
Defendants.

No. 4:13-CV-1052 CAS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Before the Court is plaintiff’s post-dismissal “motion under imminent danger.” This case
was dismissed, without prejudice, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P.41(b), on April 17, 2014. Alternatively,
plaintiff’s case was dismissed as a result of his failure to comply with Fed.R.Civ.P.8, 10 and 20, in
the filing of his sixth amended complaint.
Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration of the dismissal was denied on May 2, 2014,
wherein, like in the present motion, plaintiff merely repeated his allegations of defendants’
unlawful behavior. As noted in the Court’s Memorandum and Order denying his motion for
reconsideration, the filing of a notice of appeal in this action removed jurisdiction of this matter to
the Court of Appeals. See Griggs v. Provident Consumer Disc. Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58 (1982)
(holding that “filing of a notice of appeal is an event of jurisdictional significance – it confers
jurisdiction on the court of appeals and divests the district court of its control over those aspects of
the case involved in the appeal.”). As such, the Court will not accept any additional filings from
plaintiff in this matter.
Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s “motion under imminent danger” is
DENIED. [Doc. 65]
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall not accept any additional motions or
documents from plaintiff for filing in this action. All documents and motions mailed to the Court
by plaintiff shall be returned as set forth in this Memorandum and Order.

CHARLES A. SHAW
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 29th day of May, 2014.

2