Bynum v. VA Regional Office

Filing 20

ORDER denying Plaintiff's 18 Motion to Compel, Motion Prima Facie evidence (Complaint), Motion to proceed as a Veteran, Motion for a Protective Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge David Keesler on 2/3/2017. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(nvc)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
STATESVILLE DIVISION
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:16-CV-013-RLV-DCK
JONATHAN BYNUM,
Plaintiff,
v.
VA REGIONAL OFFICE,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER

THIS MATTER IS BEFORE THE COURT on pro se Plaintiff’s “Motion to Compel,
Motion Prima Facie evidence (Complaint), Motion to proceed as a Veteran, Motion for a
Protective Order” (Document No. 18) filed December 21, 2016. This motion has been referred to
the undersigned Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and is ripe for review. Having
carefully considered the motion and the record, the undersigned will deny the motion.
It is unclear by the instant “motion(s)” exactly what relief Plaintiff is seeking. (Document
No. 18). Plaintiff’s one (1) page filing does not state with any particularity the grounds for the
motion(s), or the relief sought. See Local Rule 7.1 (A). Moreover, Plaintiff has not included a
brief in support of his motion(s). See Local Rule 7.1 (C).
Defendant filed a timely and persuasive “…Response…” (Document No. 19) on December
29, 2016, arguing that the motion(s) should be denied. Plaintiff has failed to file a reply brief and
the time to do so has lapsed. See Local Rule 7.1(E).
Even viewing pro se Plaintiff’s filing in the most favorable light, it is a conclusory and
difficult to understand document that does not adequately describe or support any claim for relief
that the undersigned can consider.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that pro se Plaintiff’s “Motion to Compel, Motion
Prima Facie evidence (Complaint), Motion to proceed as a Veteran, Motion for a Protective Order”
(Document No. 18) is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
Signed: February 3, 2017

2