Sir Arthur Heim for Citizens Suit v. U.S. Attorney Generals Eric Holder et al

Filing 65

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - As previously ordered, any filing that does not comply with the court's November 20, 2012, Memorandum and Order 57 wil be returned to Plaintiff without filing. The court will continue to maintain a record of Plaintif f's submissions and the return of his submissions in the CM/ECF system under the "PS" designation. This Memorandum and Order serves as notice that the court will no longer forward Plaintiffs materials to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals for filing in his appellate court case (i.e., Plaintiff must mail them himself). The mailing address for the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals is Thomas F. Eagleton Courthouse / Room 24.329 / 111 South 10th Street / St. Louis, MO 63102. The clerks office is directed to forward a copy of this Memorandum and Order to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party and as directed to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals)(MKR)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
SIR ARTHUR HEIM,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
U.S. ATTORNEY GENERALS ERIC )
HOLDER, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)

8:11CV376

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. The court previously barred
Plaintiff from filing materials with this court because of his abuse of this court’s
resources and the judicial process. (Filing No. 57.) The court’s November 20, 2012,
Memorandum and Order stated:
Any future proposed filing in this matter by Plaintiff shall be referred to
the Supervising Pro Se Judge, Richard G. Kopf, or his successor, for
review before filing, and the Clerk of the court is directed not to file any
such document until this review has been completed. The Supervising Pro
Se Judge shall review any such tendered filing and if it fails to comply
with this Memorandum and Order and applicable law it shall be returned
to Plaintiff without filing. A record of any such submission and return
shall be maintained by the Clerk in the CM/ECF system under the “PS”
designation or as otherwise directed by the Supervising Pro Se Judge.
(Id. at CM/ECF p. 2.) Plaintiff has appealed this order, and this matter is currently on
appeal in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals in Case Number 13-1279. (See Eighth
Circuit Court of Appeals Scheduling Order at Filing No. 64.)
Consistent with the order cited above, the court has returned numerous filings to
Sir Arthur Heim. In addition, the court has directed the clerk’s office to forward several
of Plaintiff’s filings to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals when it appeared that

Plaintiff intended for those documents to be filed in his appellate court case. However,
Plaintiff has continued to abuse this court’s resources, and this order serves as notice
that the court will no longer direct the clerk’s office to forward Plaintiff’s filings to the
Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.
As previously ordered, any filing that does not comply with the court’s
November 20, 2012, Memorandum and Order (Filing No. 57) will be returned to
Plaintiff without filing. The court will continue to maintain a record of Plaintiff’s
submissions and the return of his submissions in the CM/ECF system under the “PS”
designation.
2.
This Memorandum and Order serves as notice that the court will no longer
forward Plaintiff’s materials to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals for filing in his
appellate court case (i.e., Plaintiff must mail them himself). The mailing address for the
Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals is Thomas F. Eagleton Courthouse / Room 24.329 / 111
South 10th Street / St. Louis, MO 63102.
3.
The clerk’s office is directed to forward a copy of this Memorandum and
Order to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
DATED this 13th day of March, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
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