Diamantopoulos v. State of Nebraska

Filing 15

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that plaintiff must file an amended complaint and a separate response to the Court's show-cause order within 45 days. Plaintiff is ordered not to file any documents aside from the ones contemplated above without first obtai ning leave of the Court. In light of the foregoing, Plaintiff's Motions to Compel 13 and 14 are denied as moot. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis 8 remains pending. The Clerk of the Court is directed to set the following pro se case management deadline: June 29, 2015: check for amended complaint and separate response. The Clerk of the Court is directed to send to plaintiff a blank civil complaint form. Ordered by Chief Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copy mailed to pro se party with form) (JSF)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
GEORGIOS DIAMANTOPOULOS,
Plaintiff,
v.
STATE OF NEBRASKA, (N.D.C.S.),
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

8:15CV114

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court for case management. For the reasons discussed
below, the Court will require Plaintiff Georgios Diamantopoulos (“Plaintiff”) to file an
amended complaint and also a separate response addressing why he is entitled to proceed
in forma pauperis in this matter.
I. BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Georgios Diamantopoulos (“Plaintiff”) filed a Complaint (Filing No. 1) and
then a Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (Filing No. 5) on April 13 and April
21, 2015. He is a pro se litigant incarcerated at the Tecumseh State Prison in Tecumseh,
Nebraska. He generally alleged in the Complaint that prison officials are violating his right
of access to the courts by refusing to provide him with various word processing services
he needs in order to comply with Supreme Court Rule 33.1(g)(1). See Sup. Ct. R. 33
(“Document Preparation: Booklet Format; 8 1/2-by 11-Inch Paper Format”).
On April 22, 2015, the Court concluded that Plaintiff had, on at least three prior
occasions while incarcerated, brought cases that were dismissed on the grounds that they
were frivolous or failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The Court
ordered Plaintiff to either pay the court’s $400.00 filing and administrative fees or show

cause for why this case should not be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). (Filing
No. 9 at ECF 2.)
Since filing the Complaint, Plaintiff has filed numerous pleadings and motions. (See
Filing Nos. 6, 7, 11, 12, 13, and 14.) Some of these supplementary materials are related
to the allegations set forth in the Complaint, and some are not; while others appear to be
related to his efforts to proceed in forma pauperis in this matter.
II. DISCUSSION
Plaintiff’s repeated filing of supplementary materials frustrates the Court’s ability to
effectively manage and progress this case. The Court cannot discern which filings pertain
to the allegations raised in his Complaint and which filings pertain to his efforts to proceed
in forma pauperis in this matter. While the Court may consider amended pleadings as
supplemental to an original pleading in pro se cases (see NECivR 15.1(b)), the Court will
no longer permit the piecemeal filing of supplemental materials in this case.
In order to ensure a just and fair resolution of Plaintiff’s case, Plaintiff is directed to
file two separate documents:
(1)

An amended complaint: The amended complaint must identify each
defendant by name and set forth all of Plaintiff’s claims (and any supporting
factual allegations) against that defendant. Plaintiff should be mindful to
explain what each defendant did to him, when the defendant did it, how the
defendant’s actions harmed him, and what specific legal right Plaintiff
believes the defendant violated.
The amended complaint must not incorporate any part of the original
complaint by reference. The amended complaint will supersede the original
complaint. Plaintiff is encouraged to use the court-approved form to draft his
amended complaint, which the Clerk of the Court will provide to him. Plaintiff
must clearly designate on the face of the document that it is the “Amended
Complaint” in this case.

2

(2)

A response to the Court’s show-cause order: The response must address
why Plaintiff believes he is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis in this
matter. As set forth in the Prison Litigation Reform Act, Plaintiff cannot
proceed in forma pauperis in this action if he has, while incarcerated, brought
three or more prior actions in a court of the United States that was
“dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a
claim upon which relief may be granted” unless he “is under imminent danger
of serious physical injury.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
Plaintiff should be mindful to explain how any allegations of imminent danger
relate to his claims against the defendants. Plaintiff must clearly designate
on the face of the document that it is the “Response to the Court’s ShowCause Order.”

Plaintiff is ordered not to file any other documents, aside from the ones
contemplated above without first obtaining leave of the Court. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
1.

Plaintiff must file an amended complaint and a separate response to the

Court’s show-cause order within 45 days. Failure to file either document will result in the
Court dismissing this action without prejudice and without further notice for failure to
prosecute it.
2.

Plaintiff is ordered not to file any documents aside from the ones

contemplated above without first obtaining leave of the Court.
3.

In light of the foregoing, Plaintiff’s Motions to Compel (Filing Nos. 13 and 14)

are denied as moot. Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis (Filing No.
8) remains pending.
4.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to set the following pro se case

management deadline: June 29, 2015: check for amended complaint and separate
response.

3

5.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to send to plaintiff a blank civil complaint

form.

DATED this 11th day of May, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
s/Laurie Smith Camp
Chief United States District Judge

4