Shareef v. Donahoe et al

Filing 92

ORDER granting 91 Motion to Stay; deferring ruling 90 Motion for Case Reassignment until the Chief Circuit Judge of the Fourth Circuit has reached an initial decision on Judicial Complaint No. 04-13-90112. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 11/1/2013. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.) (tmg)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:11-CV-615-DCK
KIMBERLY F. SHAREEF,
Plaintiff,
v.
PATRICK R. DONAHOE,
Postmaster General, U.S. Postal Service,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on “Plaintiff’s Motion To Stay Further
Proceedings Pending Case Reassignment” (Document No. 91). The parties have consented to
Magistrate Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c), and immediate review of this
motion is appropriate. Having carefully considered the motion and the record, the undersigned
will grant the motion.
The undersigned will refrain from ruling on Plaintiff’s “Motion For Case ReAssignment” (Document No. 90) until the Chief Circuit Judge of the Fourth Circuit has reached
an initial decision on Judicial Complaint No. 04-13-90112. As such, there appears to be good
cause to allow “Plaintiff’s Motion To Stay…” pending a ruling on the “Motion For Case ReAssignment.”
The Court notes that the “Federal Defendant’s Motion To Dismiss Or, In The Alternative,
For Summary Judgment” (Document No. 62) was filed on June 19, 2013. Since that filing,
Plaintiff has been allowed multiple extensions of time to file a brief in response. See (Document
Nos. 71, 76, 86, 89). Even if this case is re-assigned, the pending dispositive motion will require
a decision by the presiding judge and needs to be fully briefed. Plaintiff is respectfully advised

to be prepared to file a response to the “Federal Defendant’s Motion To Dismiss Or, In The
Alternative, For Summary Judgment” (Document No. 62) soon after the Court rules on
Plaintiff’s “Motion For Case Re-Assignment” (Document No. 90).
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that “Plaintiff’s Motion To Stay Further Proceedings
Pending Case Reassignment” (Document No. 91) is GRANTED.

Signed: November 1, 2013

2