NIBLACK v. MALBREEN et al

Filing 66

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that the Clerk shall administratively terminate Defendants' pending 57 Motion for Summary Judgment; if the global settlement conference is unsuccessful, Defendants shall submit a letter to this Court requesting that their Motion be re-instated. The Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Order upon Plaintiff by regular U.S. mail. Signed by Judge Brian R. Martinotti on 4/2/2018. (mps)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY STANLEY L. NIBLACK, Plaintiff, v. SCO MALBREEN, et al., Defendants. : : : : : : : : : : : Civil Action No. 15-5298 (BRM) MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THIS MATTER is opened to the Court by pro se Plaintiff Stanley L. Niblack (“Plaintiff”), upon the filing of a civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1). Currently pending before the Court is an unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Gary M. Lanigan, John Powell, SCO Togno, and SCO Barnes. (ECF No. 57.) In light of the global settlement conference scheduled for May 7, 2018 in all of Plaintiff’s open civil matters, the success of which would render said Motion moot, the Court will administratively terminate the Motion. If the settlement conference is unsuccessful, Defendants are advised to submit a letter to this Court requesting that their Motion be re-instated. Accordingly, IT IS it is on this 2nd day of April 2018, ORDERED that the Clerk shall ADMINISTRATIVELY TERMINATE Defendants’ pending Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 57); if the global settlement conference is unsuccessful, Defendants shall submit a letter to this Court requesting that their Motion be re-instated; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Order upon Plaintiff by regular U.S. mail. /s/ Brian R. Martinotti HON. BRIAN R. MARTINOTTI UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?