ROUDABUSH v. BITENER et al

Filing 83

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ADMINISTRATIVELY TERMINATING CASES; the hearing set for November 24, 2015 at 10:30 a.m. in these matters is cancelled. Signed by Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 11/19/15. (js)

NOT FOR PUBLICATION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

James L. Roudabush, Jr.
Plaintiff,
v.

Lt. Bitener et al.,
Defendants.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

CIV. ACTION NO. 15-3185(RMB)

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
APPLIES TO BOTH ACTIONS

_______________________________
James L. Roudabush, Jr.

:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
v.
:
:
:
Capt. Reyes et al.,
:
:
Defendants.
:
_______________________________

CIV. ACTION NO. 15-5521(RMB)

RENÉE MARIE BUMB, U.S. District Judge
I.

BACKGROUND
On October 22, 2015, this Court scheduled consolidated oral

argument on Defendants’ opposition to Plaintiff’s IFP status under
the imminent danger exception to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) in Roudabush

1

v. Bitener et al, 15cv3185(RMB) and Roudabush v Reyes et al,
15cv5521(RMB) (ECF No. 68.) On the same day, this Court granted
Defendants’ motion to seal records filed in support of their
opposition to Roudabush’s IFP status under the imminent danger
exception in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). (15cv3185, ECF No. 66; 15cv5521
ECF No. 27.) On November 2, 2015, Roudabush filed

Notices of Appeal

with the Third Circuit, appealing this Court’s order on the motions
to seal. (15cv3185, ECF Nos. 80, 81; 15cv5521, ECF Nos. 37, 38.)
II.

DISCUSSION
“As a general rule, the timely filing of a notice of appeal is

an event of jurisdictional significance, immediately conferring
jurisdiction on a Court of Appeals and divesting a district court
of its control over those aspects of the case involved in the appeal.”
Venen v. Sweet, 758 F.2d 117, 120 (3d Cir. 1985). In opposing
Defendants’ motion to seal, Plaintiff requested exclusion of his
medical records based on Defendants’ alleged violations in obtaining
his medical records. (ECF No. 59 at 4.) It is possible that the Third
Circuit Court of Appeals will address this issue in Roudabush’s
appeal of this Court’s order on the motions to seal. See U.S. v. Smith,
123 F.3d 140, 145 (3d Cir. 1997) (“[o]rders either granting or . .
. denying access to court proceedings or records are appealable as

2

final orders under § 1291.”) Therefore, in an abundance of caution,
this Court will cancel the November 24, 2015, 10:00 a.m. hearing in
these matters.
It has also come to this Court’s attention that Plaintiff is
no longer incarcerated at FCI Fort Dix, because legal mail from the
Court addressed to Roudabush at Fort Dix has been returned as unable
to forward. (15cv3185, ECF No. 82; 15cv5521, (ECF Nos. 39, 40, 41.)
Under Local Civil Rule 10.1(a), an unrepresented party “must advise
the Court of any change in . . . address within seven days of being
apprised of such change by filing a notice of said change with the
Clerk.” If a party fails to do so, the Court may impose sanctions.
(Id.) Therefore, the Court will administratively terminate
Plaintiff’s civil actions in which his mail has been returned to the
Court as undeliverable. Plaintiff may reopen these actions by
promptly supplying the Court with his new address.
IT IS therefore on this 19th day of November 2015,
ORDERED that the hearing set for November 24, 2015 at 10:30 a.m.
in these matters is cancelled; and it is further
ORDERED

that

the

Clerk

of

Court

shall

administratively

terminate Roudabush v. Bitener et al., 15cv3185(RMB) and Roudabush

3

v. Reyes et al., 15cv5521(RMB), pursuant to Local Civ. R. 10.1(a);
and it is further
ORDERED that, if within 30 days of the date of this Order,
Plaintiff notifies the Clerk of Court of his new address, the Clerk
of

Court

shall

reopen

Civil

Action

Nos.

15-3185(RMB)

and

15-5521(RMB); and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall serve a copy of this
Memorandum and Order on Plaintiff at his last known address, by
regular U.S. mail.

s/Renée Marie Bumb
RENÉE MARIE BUMB
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

4