Brown v. Sidhu et al

Filing 55

ORDER denying plaintiff Mary Ann Brown's Motion to Reopen Case (Filing No. 52 ). Ordered by Chief Judge Robert F. Rossiter, Jr. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (JSF)

8:20-cv-00342-RFR-SMB Doc # 55 Filed: 01/07/22 Page 1 of 2 - Page ID # 237

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
MARY ANN BROWN,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

8:20CV342
ORDER

Defendant.
This matter is before the Court on pro se plaintiff Mary Ann Brown’s (“Brown”)
motion to “reopen” her case (Filing No. 52). Without evidence, Brown accuses the
Assistant United States Attorney assigned to her case of “threatening” a purported witness
“at Dodge County not to help Mary Brown.” Brown states she has information from an
“RN at the Lincoln VA Medical Center” who allegedly has information about the
medication Brown took. As “proof,” Brown has affixed to her motion what appears to be
a post-it note dated December 15, 2021, that indicates the author “heard rumors at the old
building” that Brown’s “medication was contaminated.” The signature on the note is
illegible.
Presuming Brown has filed her motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
60(b), the government opposes Brown’s motion on multiple procedural grounds (Filing
No. 53). The government also understandably bristles at Brown’s “spurious allegations”
of misconduct.
Upon due consideration, the Court finds Brown has not stated a colorable basis to
“reopen” her case. As such, her motion is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated this 7th day of January 2022.

8:20-cv-00342-RFR-SMB Doc # 55 Filed: 01/07/22 Page 2 of 2 - Page ID # 238

BY THE COURT:

Robert F. Rossiter, Jr.
Chief United States District Judge

2