Reaves v. Robitaille et al

Filing 11

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's "Request for enlargement of time to serve defendants" (Filing No. 9 ) is denied. If the court determines that this matter may proceed to service of process, the court will extend the time in which Plaintiff has to serve Defendants. Plaintiff's Motion for Status (Filing No. 10 ) is granted to the extent it is consistent with this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(GJG)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
DANNY D. REAVES,
Plaintiff,
v.
JONATHAN ROBITAILLE, FBI
Agent is sued in his individual
capacity, MATT CHANDLER,
Omaha Police Officer is sued in his
individual capacity, FRANCIS
GALLO, Bellevue Police Officer is
sued in his individual capacity,
LAURIE BURGESS, Sarpy County
Prosecutor is sued in her individual
capacity, and UNKNOWN LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS,
Unknown Law Enforcement Officers
is sued in their individual capacity,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

8:13CV141

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Status and “Request for
enlargement of time to serve defendants.” (Filing Nos. 9 and 10.) In Plaintiff’s
Motion for Status, Plaintiff seeks information on the status of his Motion for Leave
to Proceed in Forma Pauperis and the payment of his initial partial filing fee. (Filing
No. 10.) On June 11, 2013, the court granted Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed
in Forma Pauperis, and ordered Plaintiff to pay an initial partial filing fee in the
amount of $54.12. (Filing No. 8.) The court received payment of Plaintiff’s initial
partial filing fee on July 9, 2013. (Docket Sheet.)
The next step in Plaintiff’s case is for the court to conduct an initial review of
Plaintiff’s claims to determine whether summary dismissal is appropriate under 28

U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2). The court will conduct this initial review in its normal course
of business. If the court determines that this matter may proceed to service of process,
the court will extend the time in which Plaintiff has to serve Defendants.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.
Plaintiff’s “Request for enlargement of time to serve defendants” (Filing
No. 9) is denied. If the court determines that this matter may proceed to service of
process, the court will extend the time in which Plaintiff has to serve Defendants.
2.
Plaintiff’s Motion for Status (Filing No. 10) is granted to the extent it is
consistent with this Memorandum and Order.
DATED this 30th day of August, 2013.
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