Bruesch v. Schmalenberger et al

Filing 27

ORDER by Magistrate Judge Charles S. Miller, Jr. re 26 Motion on Questions to the Court Regarding this Complaint. (KT) Distributed on 11/5/2013 (jt).

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA
SOUTHWESTERN DIVISION13-77

Nicholas Dodge Bruesch,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Robyn Schmalenberger, Patrick Branson,
Tammy Homan, Darlyn Kunz, and
Marlane Middlestead,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S QUESTIONS
REGARDING THIS COMPLAINT

Case No. 1:13-cv-077

Before the court is a document captioned “Questions to the Court Regarding this Complaint”
filed by Plaintiff Nicholas Dodge Bruesch, an inmate at the James River Correctional Center, on
November 4, 2013 (Docket No. 26). Plaintiff is concerned because he has not received a report and
recommendation from the court and inquires as to why Defendants answered a complaint that Plaintiff
believes has not yet been through all the proper proceedings in this court.
The court assumes that Plaintiff is concerned that his complaint has not been screened as
mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which requires the court to conduct an early review of inmate
complaints against governmental entities and governmental employees and to dismiss certain meritless
claims early in the proceeding. The court notes that it addressed the issue of § 1915A screening in the
Order to Answer filed August 28, 2013 (Docket No. 13). In that order, the court concluded that the
claims in Plaintiff’s amended complaint were sufficient to survive §1915A screening and ordered
Defendants to file an answer addressing all claims. Defendants filed an answer as ordered by the
court. Accordingly, no report and recommendation has been or will be issued because Plaintiff has
been permitted to proceed with all claims in the amended complaint.

Dated this 5th day of November, 2013.
/s/ Charles S. Miller, Jr.
Charles S. Miller, Jr.
United States Magistrate Judge

2