Fugate v. Chester Bross Construction Co.

Filing 37

ORDER Plaintiffs requests for reconsideration of the dismissal of this action are DENIED and this case shall remain closed; ORDERED that Defendants Motion to Strike Plaintiffs Amended Complaint (Doc. #36) is DENIED as moot. Signed on 1/12/16 by District Judge Stephen R. Bough. A copy of this Order mailed to Marcus W Fugate, OZARK CORRECTIONAL CENTER, 929 Honor Camp Lane, Fordland, MO 65652-7200 (Amos, Gloria)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
CENTRAL DIVISION
MARCUS WAYNE FUGATE,
Plaintiff,
v.
CHESTER BROSS CONSTRUCTION CO.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:15-cv-04014-SRB

ORDER
On May 12, 2015, the Court denied Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and instructed
Plaintiff to file an amended complaint alleging sufficient facts to support his claim for
discrimination. Plaintiff was advised that failure to comply with the Court’s Order would result
in a dismissal of his action. The Court did not receive the amended complaint within the thirtyday time limit set out in the Court’s Order. On June 23, 2015, the Court directed Plaintiff to
show cause why the case should not be dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to file an amended
complaint. Plaintiff was cautioned that, “[f]ailure to comply with the Court’s Order will result in
a dismissal of this action.” (Doc. #21). The Court did not receive a response, and this action was
dismissed on July 8, 2015, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
On October 28, 2015, Plaintiff submitted a letter requesting the Court reconsider its
dismissal of this action and reopen the case. The Court entered another show cause order on
November 16, 2015, directing Plaintiff to submit proof that he timely submitted his Amended
Complaint, because no amended complaint had been received by the Court. On December 1,
2015, after no response to the November 16 show cause order was received, the Court denied
Plaintiff’s request to reopen the case.

On December 2, 2015, Plaintiff requested an extension of time to rewrite his amended
complaint. The Court denied Plaintiff’s request, but allowed Plaintiff an extension of time to
submit proof that he attempted to file an amended complaint pursuant to the May 12, 2015,
Order. (Doc. #33). Plaintiff was advised that proof of compliance was necessary in order for the
Court to consider whether to reopen Plaintiff’s case. The Court advised Plaintiff that “[e]xamples
of such proof would be a record of mailing, a copy of a returned envelope, if any, or any other
item that would demonstrate Plaintiff’s good faith attempt to file an amended complaint.” Id. at
p. 2. Despite the Court’s Order, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint on December 21, 2015.
On January 8, 2016, Plaintiff submitted an Affidavit stating he does not have proof that he timely
filed his Amended Complaint. (Doc. #36). Plaintiff was advised that sufficient documentation
was required in order for the Court to consider whether to reopen Plaintiff’s case. Consequently,
this case will remain closed.
Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s requests for reconsideration of the dismissal of this action are
DENIED and this case shall remain closed; and
ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc.
#36) is DENIED as moot.

/s/ Stephen R. Bough
STEPHEN R. BOUGH
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: January 12, 2016