Rossman v. Donaldson et al

Filing 5

ORDER denying 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; adopting Report and Recommendations re 3 Report and Recommendation.. Signed by Honorable Timothy D. DeGiusti on 11/8/2016. (mb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
BRUD ROSSMANN,
Plaintiff,
v.
SCOTT DONALDSON, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. CIV-16-1118-D

ORDER
Plaintiff, appearing pro se, brings the present action alleging various abuses
by private and governmental persons and entities. In connection with his
complaint, Plaintiff sought leave to proceed in forma pauperis [Doc. No. 2]. The
matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bernard Jones for initial
proceedings. On October 4, 2016, Judge Jones issued his Report and
Recommendation (“R&R”) [Doc. No. 3] in which he recommended that Plaintiff’s
request be denied for failure to submit a properly supported application. Judge
Jones also recommended that Plaintiff not be given the opportunity to further
amend his application in light of his well-documented history as a vexatious
litigant.
In his R&R, Judge Jones advised Plaintiff of his right to object and directed
Plaintiff to file any objections no later than October 25, 2016. Judge Jones further
admonished Plaintiff that failure to timely object would constitute a waiver of the

right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues addressed in the R&R. The
deadline for filing objections has expired and to date, Plaintiff has not filed an
objection or sought an extension of time in which to do so.1 Accordingly, the
Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 3] is ADOPTED as though fully set forth
herein.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to
Proceed In Forma Pauperis [Doc. No. 2] is DENIED. Plaintiff is advised that if he
does not pay the requisite filing fee to the Clerk of Court within twenty-one (21)
days from the date this Order is filed, his action will be dismissed without
prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 8th day of November, 2016.

1

According to the civil docket sheet, notice of the Magistrate’s R&R was returned
due to an insufficient address [Doc. No. 4]. However, parties appearing pro se have
a continuing duty to notify the Clerk, in writing, of any change in their mailing
address. See LCvR 5.4(a). Furthermore, “[p]apers sent by the court will be deemed
delivered if sent to the last known address given to the court.” Id. (emphasis
added).