COFIELD v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE et al

Filing 46

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying Pltf's 36 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings ; denying as moot Pltf's 38 Motion to Add Defendants and Amend the Complaint, etc. Signed by Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 8/25/2016. (dmr)(n.m.)

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
CAMDEN VICINAGE

Dr. Keenan K. Cofield,
Plaintiff,
v.
United States Dep’t
of Justice, et al.,
Defendants.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Civil Action No. 15-558(RMB)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter comes before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion
for Judgment on the Pleadings (ECF No. 36); and Motion to Add
Defendants (amend complaint) (ECF No. 38.)
I.

BACKGROUND
Plaintiff’s prisoner civil rights action was transferred to

this Court from the United States District Court, District of
Columbia on

January

28,

2015.

(Transfer

Order,

ECF

No.

12.)

Plaintiff’s claims arose out of events that occurred while he was
imprisoned at the Federal Correctional Institution (“FCI-Fairton”)
in Fairton, N.J. (Compl., ECF No. 1-1 at 4-15.)
Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on August 21, 2015. (ECF
No. 19.) On February 3, 2016, this Court granted Defendants’ motion
to dismiss, and dismissed the following claims with prejudice: the
Bivens claims against the U.S. Department of Justice, the Federal
1

Bureau of Prisons (and divisions within the FBOP); Bivens claims
against each of the federal officials and employees in their
official

capacities;

and

the

Due

Process

claim

related

to

Plaintiff’s placement in administrative segregation. (Order, ECF
No. 23.) The Court dismissed the remainder of the claims in
Plaintiff’s Complaint without prejudice, allowing Plaintiff to
file an amended complaint to cure the deficiencies in his original
complaint. (Id.)
II.

DISCUSSION
A.

Motion To Add Defendants

On July 5, 2016, Plaintiff submitted an Amended Complaint
together with a motion to add defendants. When the Court dismissed
certain of Plaintiff’s claims without prejudice, Plaintiff was
given permission to file an Amended Complaint, and the present
motion is unnecessary. Defendants have responded to the Amended
Complaint
pending.

by

bringing

Plaintiff’s

a

partial

Amended

motion

Complaint

to
(ECF

dismiss,
No.

38)

which
is

is
the

operative pleading, and the present motion will be denied as moot.
B.

Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings

Plaintiff’s motion is based on Defendants’ failure to respond
to his motion to strike (ECF. 34), filed on March 17, 2016. The
Court denied Plaintiff’s motion to strike on June 1, 2016, because
the subject of the motion to strike, Defendants’ letter response
to Plaintiff’s motions (ECF No. 33), was not an improper ex parte
2

letter. (Order, ECF No. 37.) Therefore, Plaintiff is not entitled
to relief on his motion for judgment on the pleadings.
IT IS, therefore, on this 25th day of August, 2016,
ORDERED that the Clerk shall reopen this matter; and it is
further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Add Defendants and Amend
the Complaint (ECF No. 38) is DENIED as moot; and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
(ECF No. 36) is DENIED; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk shall serve a copy of this Order upon
Plaintiff by regular U.S. Mail.

s/RENÉE MARIE BUMB__________
RENÉE MARIE BUMB
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

3