Reid v. State of North Carolina et al

Filing 4

ORDER denying 3 Motion to Consolidate. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 12/29/09. (gpb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION CIVIL ACTION NO: 3:09-CV-541-RJC-DCK

O'MARR S. REID, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, and ROBIN E. HUDSON, Defendants.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on the "Motion to Consolidate" (Document No. 3) filed on December 23, 2009, by O'Marr Reid ("Plaintiff"). This matter has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b), and immediate review is appropriate. Having reviewed the record, the undersigned will deny the motion for the following reasons: The text of the pro se Plaintiff's entire motion consists only of the following statements: "This motion for JOINDER OF DEFENDANTS is necessary, further to cut down the expense and time of commencing said issue. Both parties issues are within the same subject matter and is necessary to have them joined into one action." (Document No. 3). Plaintiff has not filed a brief explaining any basis for these statements. See LCvR 7.1 (requiring brief to be filed contemporaneously with motion). The pro se Complaint sheds no light on these statements, given that it names two Defendants and mentions no others. In other words, the two Defendants are already named in the present action

Page 1 of 2

and need not be "joined." The record contains no information about any other cases, parties, or claims that could be consolidated or joined, much less any basis to do so. At this time, there are no alleged facts or arguments before the Court in support of this motion. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Plaintiff's "Motion to Consolidate" (Document No. 3) is DENIED without prejudice.

Signed: December 29, 2009

Page 2 of 2