Oppenheim v. Lampert

Filing 25

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's Motion to Correct Errors (Filing No. 22 ) and Motion to Correct Case Code (Filing No. 23 ) are denied. Plaintiff's Motion to Seal Amended Complaint (Filing No. 24 ) is granted. The Clerk of the court is directed to seal plaintiff's Amended Complaint (i.e. Filing No. 16 ). Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (Copy e-mailed to pro se party) (AOA)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
ALEXANDER W. OPPENHEIM, et
al.,

)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
KEITH M. LAMPERT,
)
)
Defendant.
)
______________________________)

8:11CV437

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on plaintiff’s Motion
to Correct Errors (Filing No. 22), Motion to Correct Case Code
(Filing No. 23) and Motion to Seal Amended Complaint (Filing No.
24).

The Court will address each motion in turn.
In his Motion to Correct Errors and Motion to Correct

Case Code, plaintiff states that sometime in March 2012, this
action was reclassified as a “Prisoner’s Rights/Prisoner’s
Petition.”

(Filing Nos. 22 and 23.)

Plaintiff asks the Court to

reclassify this case as “Civil Rights-Other Civil Rights.”
(Filing No. 23.)

However, the Court classifies, and may

reclassify, cases for internal statistical purposes.
Accordingly, plaintiff’s Motion to Correct Case Code and Motion
to Correct Errors will be denied.
In his Motion to Seal Amended Complaint, plaintiff asks
the Court to seal his Amended Complaint because it contains
“confidential” facts (Filing No. 24).
plaintiff’s Motion to Seal.

The Court will grant

IT IS ORDERED:
1.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Correct Errors (Filing No.

22) and Motion to Correct Case Code (Filing No. 23) are denied.
2.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Seal Amended Complaint

(Filing No. 24) is granted.

The Clerk of the court is directed

to seal plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (i.e. Filing No. 16).
DATED this 24th day of April, 2012.
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.
-2-