Winston v. Gray et al

Filing 31

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' motion to dismiss [# 19 ] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff DeAngelo Don'Virgil Winston's motion to request a continuance [# 22 ], motion to amend [# 21 ], mot ion requesting a continuance [# 23 ], and motion requesting injunctive relief [# 29 ] are DENIED IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants' motion to strike [# 24 ] is DENIED as moot. Signed by District Judge Rodney W. Sippel on 5/29/15. (JWD)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
DEANGELO DON’VIRGIL WINSTON,
Plaintiff,
vs.
RICHARD GRAY, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 4:14 CV 1898 RWS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On March 3, 2015, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss Plaintiff DeAngelo
Don’Virgil Winston’s complaint for his failure to provide Defendants with the
discovery disclosures required by my order of January 12, 2015. On March 4,
2015, I issued an order directing Winston to respond to the motion and state why
his case should not be dismissed for failing to comply with my order of January 12,
2015.
On March 12, 2015, Winston filed a request to continue the case
management order. In that motion Winston asserts that he has been unable to
conduct legal research and he has been denied access to a copier and a typewriter.
This motion does not address why he failed to comply with the discovery
disclosures mandated by my order of January 12, 2105. On March 13, 2015,
Winston filed an amended complaint attempting to add two additional pro se
plaintiffs. The amended complaint is improper because it attempts to add

additional pro se plaintiffs who are seeking to proceed in forma pauperis. See
Georgeoff v. Barnes, 2009 WL 1405497 *1 (E.D. Mo. May 18, 2009 ).
On March 16, 2015, Winston filed a motion for a continuance of this case
which was does not address why he failed to comply with the discovery disclosures
mandated by my order of January 12, 2105. On March 26, 2015, Winston filed a
motion for injunctive relief which seeks relief beyond the scope of Winston’s
complaint.
Winston’s claim in his complaint is very straightforward. He alleges that he
is being denied kosher meals in violation his rights to free exercise of religion
under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, 42 U.S.C §
2000cc, et seq. Instead of complying with the January 12, 2015 order of this Court
to provide discovery to Defendants, Winston has chosen to file frivolous motions
in this case. Winston does not need a typewriter or legal research to provide the
ordered discovery. By his filings subsequent to Defendants’ motion to dismiss,
Winston has shown he had the ability and postage to provide the discovery
required by my order of January 12, 2015. He has failed to do so without good
cause. As a result, I find that Defendants’ motion to dismiss should be granted for
Winston’s failure to produce discovery as ordered.
I note that Defendants have represented in an April 2, 2015 filing that
Winston has been receiving three kosher meals a day. Winston has not disputed
this assertion.
Accordingly,
~2~

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants’ motion to dismiss [#19] is
GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff DeAngelo Don’Virgil
Winston=s motion to request a continuance [#22], motion to amend [#21], motion
requesting a continuance [#23], and motion requesting injunctive relief [#29] are
DENIED
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ motion to strike [#24] is
DENIED as moot.

____________________________
RODNEY W. SIPPEL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated this 29th day of May, 2015.

~3~