Barta v. Farm Service Agency et al

Filing 69

ORDER granting 66 Motion to Strike, 67 Motion to Quash and 68 Motion to Quash. The Clerk of the court is directed not to process the summons forms contained in Plaintiffs Notice (Filing No. 65 .) All other relief requested by Plaintiff i n the Notice is denied; and In the event that Plaintiff files summons forms, USM-285 forms, or any otherNotice or Affidavit of Facts in the future, the court will take no action onthose documents and Defendants need not respond to such filings unlessordered to do so by the court. Ordered by Chief Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(MKR)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
DALE LEIGHTON BARTA,
Plaintiff,
v.
FARM SERVICE AGENCY, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 8:11CV198

ORDER

This matter is before the court on Defendants’ Motion to Strike (Filing No. 66) and
Motions to Quash (Filing Nos. 67 and 68). The court granted Defendants’ Motions to
Dismiss, dismissing this matter without prejudice, on December 20, 2011. (Filing No. 51.)
On that same date, the court entered Judgment in favor of Defendants. (Filing No. 52.)
Plaintiff thereafter filed several summons forms, which the Clerk of the court docketed as
a Notice of Summons. (Filing No. 59.) Defendants requested that the court quash those
summonses because the court has already entered judgment against Plaintiff and he is
therefore not entitled to any relief. The court granted those requests. (Filing No. 64.)
On April 11, 2012, Plaintiff filed a similar document containing summons forms,
“Notices,” “Affidavits,” and USM-285 forms, which the Clerk of the court docketed as a
Notice. (Filing No. 65). Defendants again seek to quash this “Notice.” For the same
reasons as set forth in the court’s previous Memorandum and Order, the court agrees that
the summons forms should not be issued in light of the dismissal of this matter and that
no further relief is warranted.
In addition, in the event that Plaintiff files summons forms, USM-285 forms, or any
other “Notice” or “Affidavit of Facts” in the future, the court will take no action on those

documents. Thus, in the event that Plaintiff files the same or similar documents in the
future, Defendants need not respond to such filings unless ordered to do so by the court.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.

Defendants’ Motion to Strike (Filing No. 66) and Motions to Quash (Filing
Nos. 67 and 68) are granted;

2.

The Clerk of the court is directed not to process the summons forms
contained in Plaintiff’s Notice (Filing No. 65.) All other relief requested by
Plaintiff in the Notice is denied; and

3.

In the event that Plaintiff files summons forms, USM-285 forms, or any other
“Notice” or “Affidavit of Facts” in the future, the court will take no action on
those documents and Defendants need not respond to such filings unless
ordered to do so by the court.

DATED this 24th day of April, 2012.
BY THE COURT:

s/Laurie Smith Camp
Chief 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