Ornelas v. Houston et al

Filing 35

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying 32 Motion for Reconsideration. In accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(4)(A), Defendants shall file their answer no later than 14 days from the date of this Memorandum and Order. The clerk's office is directed to set the following pro se case management deadline: July 11, 2014: Check for answer from Defendants. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (JSF)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
FRANCISCO ORNELAS,
Plaintiff,
v.
ROBERT HOUSTON, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

8:13CV118

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration.
(Filing No. 32.) On October 22, 2013, Defendants moved to dismiss this action
against Defendants in their individual capacities for the reason that Plaintiff had
failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Filing No. 29.) However,
Defendants neglected to file a separate brief in support of the Motion. (See Filing No.
30.) On March 18, 2014, the court denied Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. (Filing
No. 31.) It did so, not because of Defendants’ error, but because the court had
already determined in its initial review of Plaintiff’s Complaint that Plaintiff had
stated a claim upon which relief may be granted against Defendants. (See Filing No.
16 and Filing No. 31.)
In Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration, Defendants ask the court to
reconsider its order denying their Motion to Dismiss. (Filing No. 32.) In support of
the Motion for Reconsideration, Defendants have filed the Brief they had prepared
and intended to file in support of their original Motion to Dismiss. (See Filing No.
32 and Filing No. 33.)
The court has carefully reviewed the record in this matter and sees no reason
to reconsider its previous order denying Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff
alleges in his Complaint, and in particular the 20 pages of materials attached to his
Complaint, that he had serious medical needs and Defendants had knowledge of his

serious medical needs. (Filing No. 1.) Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment
medical claims survive Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, as do his state law claims.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.

Defendants’ Motion for Reconsideration (Filing No. 32) is denied.

2.
In accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(a)(4)(A),
Defendants shall file their answer no later than 14 days from the date of this
Memorandum and Order.
3.
The clerk’s office is directed to set the following pro se case
management deadline: July 11, 2014: Check for answer from Defendants.
DATED this 24th day of June, 2014.
BY THE COURT:

s/ Joseph F. Bataillon
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