Rittner v. Williams et al

Filing 131

Order denying emergency motion for a preliminary injunction (Related Doc # 129 ). Judge James G. Carr on 1/25/16.(C,D)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION

Daniel Rittner, Sr.,

Case No. 3:13CV1345
Plaintiff,

v.

ORDER

Jesse Williams, et al.,
Defendants.

This is a pro se civil rights suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The plaintiff, Daniel Rittner, is an inmate of an Ohio prison who alleges staff there have
been, and continue to be, deliberately indifferent to his serious medical needs.
In an effort to streamline this litigation and adjudicate the defendants’ motion for judgment
on the pleadings (Doc. 94), I barred both sides from filing any pretrial motions without an
accompanying motion for leave and a showing of good cause. (Doc. 99). Nevertheless, Rittner has
persisted in filing pretrial motions without good cause to do so. (Doc. 128) (denying Rittner leave
to file twelve pretrial motions).
Pending is Rittner’s emergency motion for a preliminary injunction. (Doc. 129). He alleges
the defendants have withheld “his treating physicians’ and specialists’ prescription and treatment
plans for [his] objectively serious medical needs.” (Id. at 1).

I overrule the motion, due to Rittner’s non-compliance with prior orders, his failure to
support his contentions with non-conclusory allegations, and his failure to show good cause for the
relief he seeks.
So ordered.
/s/ James G. Carr
Sr. U.S. District Judge

2