Kislyak v. York County Sheriff's Department

Filing 11

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's Motion for Extension of Time (Filing No. 7 ) is denied without prejudice to reassertion; and Plaintiff's "Motion to Transfer" (Filing No. 8 ) is denied. Ordered by Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copy mailed/e-mailed to pro se party) (TEL)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA PAVEL KISLYAK, Plaintiff, v. YORK COUNTY SHERIFF’S DEPARTMENT, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 4:11CV3100 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time and Motion to Transfer. (Filing Nos. 7 and 8.) For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiff’s Motions are denied. Plaintiff filed a Motion for Extension of Time on August 4, 2011. (Filing No. 7.) Plaintiff’s Motion is very difficult to decipher. As best as the court can tell, Plaintiff seeks an extension of time for any and all deadlines set by the court in this matter. However, there are no deadlines currently pending (see Docket Sheet), and the court declines to enter a blanket extension of time for all future deadlines it may set. As such, the court will deny Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time, but will do so without prejudice to reassertion in the event the court imposes a deadline that Plaintiff is unable to meet. Plaintiff filed a “Motion to Transfer” on August 4, 2011. (Filing No. 8.) In his Motion, Plaintiff seeks the right to remove an action currently pending in state court to federal court. (Id.) However, in order to remove an action from state to federal court, Plaintiff must comply with the proper procedure for removal set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 1446, including filing “a short and plain statement of the grounds for removal” and a copy of all process, pleadings, and orders served upon him in the state-court action. See 28 U.S.C. § 1446(a). Here, there is no indication that Plaintiff complied with the proper procedure for removal set forth in the federal rules. As such, his “Motion to Transfer” (Filing No. 8) will be denied. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff’s Motion for Extension of Time (Filing No. 7) is denied without prejudice to reassertion; and 2. Plaintiff’s “Motion to Transfer” (Filing No. 8) is denied. DATED this 10th day of August, 2011. BY THE COURT: s/Laurie Smith Camp United States District Judge *This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court. 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?