Rossmann v. Bell et al

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM OPINION - This matter is before the Court on its own motion. On May 22, 2014, the Court conducted an initial review of plaintiff's complaint and found that it failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted (Filing No. 6 ). Plaintiff was given the opportunity to amend his claims, but he was warned that, if he failed to do so by June 23, 2014, his complaint would "be dismissed without further notice." (Id. at CM/ECF p. 5.) Plaintiff has not amended his complaint and the time in which to do so has now passed. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this memorandum opinion. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
BRUD ROSSMANN, Esquire,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
SUSAN BELL, JOHN DOE-1, JOHN )
DOE-2, JOHN DOE-3,
)
)
Defendants.
)
______________________________)

4:14CV3019

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on its own motion.

On

May 22, 2014, the Court conducted an initial review of
plaintiff’s complaint and found that it failed to state a claim
upon which relief may be granted (Filing No. 6).

Plaintiff was

given the opportunity to amend his claims, but he was warned
that, if he failed to do so by June 23, 2014, his complaint would
“be dismissed without further notice.”

(Id. at CM/ECF p. 5.)

Plaintiff has not amended his complaint and the time in which to
do so has now passed.

A separate judgment will be entered in

accordance with this memorandum opinion.
DATED this 8th day of July, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Lyle E. Strom
____________________________
LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge
United States District Court
*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.