Woolman v. Tabitha et al

Filing 10

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's Motion to File the Petition Out of Time 9 is granted 9 . This matter is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy e-mailed to pro se party)(MKR)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
MICHAEL B. WOOLMAN,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
TABITHA, and HOSPIS & HEALTH )
CARE SERVICES,
)
)
Defendants.
)

4:13CV3116

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. On September 17, 2013, the
court conducted an initial review of Plaintiff’s Complaint. (Filing No. 8.) The court
determined that, “[e]ven when liberally construed, Plaintiff’s Complaint raises no
claims and makes no allegations against the defendants in this matter.” (Id. at
CM/ECF p. 2.) On the court’s own motion, it gave Plaintiff 30 days in which to
amend his Complaint to clearly state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Id.
at CM/ECF p. 3.)
Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint out of time on October 22, 2013. (Filing
No. 9.) Even when liberally construed, Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint raises no
claims and makes no allegations against Defendants. For this reason, and for the
reasons set forth in the court’s September 17, 2013, Memorandum and Order, this
matter is dismissed.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.
granted.

Plaintiff’s “Motion to File the Petition Out of Time” (Filing No. 9) is

2.
This matter is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted.

3.
A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this
Memorandum and Order.
DATED this 28th day of October, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Richard G. Kopf
Senior 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