Stevens et al v. Animal Control Officer et al
ORDER by Judge Ronald A. White granting defendant's motion to dismiss ( 97 Motion to Dismiss ; 97 Motion for More Definite Statement) and dismissing party defendant Days Inn, Inc. ((Nationally) (lal, Deputy Clerk)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
Case No. CIV-16-531-RAW
MUSKOGEE, OKLAHOMA ANIMAL
CONTROL, et al.,
Before the court is the motion of defendant Days Inns Worldwide, Inc. to dismiss or
in the alternative for more definite statement. Plaintiff, appearing pro se, alleges multiple
claims pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §1983 against multiple defendants. Plaintiff was convicted in
Texas state court for possession of child pornography, and those convictions were recently
affirmed. Stevens v. State, 2017 WL 411382 (Tex.App. - Tyler 2017). Initially, plaintiff was
arrested for cruelty to animals, and six horses that were determined to be in poor condition
were moved “to another location for treatment.” Id. at *1.
The complaint does not appear to make specific allegations as to movant, and
therefore fails to state a claim.
The motion was filed on July 19, 2017 and plaintiff has
failed to respond within the time provided by Local Civil Rule 7.1(d). Upon review, the
court finds the motion is well-taken. Dismissal is also appropriate on statute of limitations
grounds, for reasons recited in contemporaneous orders in this case. The court declines to
grant an additional 14 days (as contemplated by Local Civil Rule 7.1(g) because plaintiff has
previously been granted additional time regarding other pending motions (see #93).
It is the order of the court that the motion to dismiss (#97) is hereby granted. Days
Inn Worldwide, Inc. is dismissed as a party defendant.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 18th day of AUGUST, 2017.
RONALD A. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?