Kurtz v. Miller et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION - This matter is before the Court on its own motion. Upon careful review of Kurtz's complaint, the Court finds that his allegations are nonsensical and he can prove no set of facts that would entitle him to relief. A separate order will be entered in accordance with this memorandum opinion. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
JOSEPH A. TIMOTHY KURTZ,
TASHA MILLER, JIM FISK,
nephew, BRUCE KOEHLER,
MATTHEW HIMELIC, son, CARRIE )
HIMELIC, if needed, GEORGE
HIMELIC, CHRISTOPHER MARYLAND,)
Friends and Family, and DAVID )
This matter is before the Court on its own motion.
July 8, 2014, the Court conducted an initial review of
The Court determined it could not tell
from the information set forth in the complaint whether
jurisdiction is proper in this Court.
Plaintiff was to file an
amended complaint that set forth a short and plain statement of
the grounds for the Court’s jurisdiction.
In addition, the Court
reserved the right to conduct further review of plaintiff’s
claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2).
(See Filing No. 6.)
The deadline for filing an amended complaint has
passed, and plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or asked
for an extension of time in which to do so.1
Upon careful review
of Kurtz’s complaint, the Court finds that his allegations are
nonsensical and he can prove no set of facts that would entitle
him to relief.
A separate order will be entered in accordance
with this memorandum opinion.
DATED this 4th day of September, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Lyle E. Strom
LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge
United States District Court
The Court’s Memorandum and Order dated July 8, 2014, was
returned to the Court as “NOT DELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSED” and
“UNABLE TO FORWARD.” (See Filing No. 7.) Kurtz, a frequent
filer in this Court, has been informed numerous times of his
obligation to inform the Court of address changes. See NEGenR
1.3(e) and (g) (requiring pro se parties to adhere to local rules
and inform the Court of address changes within 30 days). (See,
e.g., Kurtz v. France, et al., No. 8:14-CV-00117-JMG-PRSE; Kurtz
v. Williams, et al., 8:14-CV-00191-JMG-PRSE; Kurtz v. Miller, et
al., 8:14-CV-00139-LES-PRSE; and Kurtz v. Fisk, et al.,
*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.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?