INGRAM v. WARDEN OF ATLANTIC COUNTY JUSTICE FACILITY et al

Filing 21

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: ORDERED that the Clerk shall reopen this matter. ORDERED that Plaintiff may reinstate the claims within thirty days from the date of entry of this Memorandum Opinion and Order. ORDERED that the Clerk shall administratively terminate this matter, etc.. Signed by Judge Noel L. Hillman on 07/05/2012. (tf, n.m.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
_______________________________
:
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
v.
:
:
WARDEN et al.,
:
:
Defendants.
:
_______________________________:
SEAN L. INGRAM, SR.,

Civil Action No.
10-4151 (NLH)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
AND ORDER

This matter comes before the Court upon the United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit’s order dismissing
Plaintiff’s appeal for lack of jurisdiction, see Docket Entry No.
19, and it appearing that:
1.

On August 13, 2010, Plaintiff, a convicted state prisoner,
submitted for filing his original complaint and his
application to proceed in this matter in forma pauperis,
see Docket Entry No. 1, and – on September 30, 2010, –
submitted his first amended complaint, see Docket Entry No.
6, which the Court construed as a supplement to the original
complaint.

2.

On December 17, 2010, this Court issued an order and
accompanying opinion, construing the totality of Plaintiff’s
submissions as setting forth allegations raised by a pretrial detainee, and dismissing one claim with prejudice and
another series of claims without prejudice.
Page -1-

See Docket

Entries Nos. 8 and 9.
3.

In response, Plaintiff requested an extension of time to
file both his second amended complaint and, simultaneously,
his notice of appeal challenging the Court’s above-detailed
determination.

4.

See Docket Entry No. 10.

The Court granted Plaintiff’s motion with regard to his
requests for extension of time, see Docket Entry No. 13,
while explaining to Plaintiff that, for the purposes of the
instant proceedings, Plaintiff’s appellate application would
be interlocutory unless Plaintiff elected to decline his
opportunity to replead the claims dismissed without
prejudice.

Se id.

The Court stressed that Plaintiff could

not pursue an appeal from a final determination (if he so
elected) and simultaneously pursue this matter by filing a
second amended complaint.
5.

See id.

Nevertheless, Plaintiff filed his notice of appeal and, two
weeks later, submitted his second amended complaint in this
matter.

5.

See Docket Entries Nos. 14 and 16.

Noting that Plaintiff’s appeal was interlocutory, the Court
of Appeals dismissed his appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
See Docket Entry No. 19.

6.

Plaintiff’s second amended complaint is still pending.
Court has no information as to whether or not Plaintiff
still wishes to continue his litigation of the instant

Page -2-

This

matter with regard to the claims dismissed by the Court
without prejudice.
IT IS, therefore, on this

5th

day of

July , 2012,

ORDERED that the Clerk shall reopen this matter in light of
the entry of the Court of Appeals’ ruling, Docket Entry No. 19,
by making a new and separate entry on the docket reading “CIVIL
CASE REOPENED”; and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff may, if he so desires, reinstate the
claims asserted in his second amended complaint by submitting a
written statement to the Clerk informing the Court of Plaintiff’s
interest in litigating his claims dismissed by this Court without
prejudice; and it is further
ORDERED that, in the event Plaintiff elects to file such
written statement, Plaintiff shall do so within thirty days from
the date of entry of this Memorandum Opinion and Order; and it is
further
ORDERED that, in the event Plaintiff timely files such
written statement, the Court will screen Plaintiff’s second
amended complaint on the merits; and it is further
ORDERED that, in the event no written statement is received
from Plaintiff within thirty days from the date of entry of this
Memorandum Opinion and Order, Plaintiff’s challenges dismissed by
this Court without prejudice will be deemed voluntarily
withdrawn, without prejudice to Plaintiff’s raising these

Page -3-

challenges by means of a new and separate civil complaint.

The

Court, however, stresses that no statement made in this
Memorandum Opinion and Order shall be construed as expressing
this Court’s opinion as to substantive or procedural validity or
invalidity of these challenges, in the event they are raised by
means of a new and separate civil complaint; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk shall administratively terminate this
matter, subject to reopening in the event Plaintiff timely
submits his written statement, by entering a new and separate
entry on the docket reading “CIVIL CASE TERMINATED”; and it is
finally
ORDERED that the Clerk shall serve this Memorandum Opinion
and Order upon Plaintiff by regular U.S. mail.

s/ Noel L. Hillman
NOEL L. HILLMAN
United States District Judge
At Camden, New Jersey

Page -4-