BAEZ v. CONNELLY et al
Filing
64
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER denying without prejudice Defendant's 63 Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff is ordered to file his pretrial memorandum on or before April 15, 2013. Plaintiff is warned that his failure to file a pretrial memorandum may resu lt in dismissal of this action. That portion of the 56 pretrial order requiring Defendant to file a pretrial memorandum within 30 days of this order is vacated. The Court will set a new deadline for the filing of Defendants pretrial memorandum after April 15, 2013.. So Ordered by Chief Judge Mary M. Lisi on 3/14/2013. (Duhamel, John)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
SANDY BAEZ
v.
CA 10-399
CONNELLY, et al.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Defendant Kleczkowski’s motion to dismiss
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Plaintiff has not filed a response and the time for
doing so has passed.
Defendant Kleczkowski seeks a dismissal of this action for Plaintiff’s failure to
prosecute his claim because Plaintiff “has been deported and he is not authorized to
reenter the United States for trial.” Defendant’s memorandum, pg. 2. Plaintiff,
however, has actively engaged in this litigation. As late as January 15, 2013, Plaintiff
filed an appeal from the magistrate judge’s order denying his motion to appoint counsel.
The Court is, therefore, reluctant at this time to dismiss this action for lack of
prosecution.
Defendant’s Motion is DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff is ordered to file his
pretrial memorandum on or before April 15, 2013. Plaintiff is warned that his failure to
file a pretrial memorandum may result in dismissal of this action. That portion of the
pretrial order requiring Defendant to file a pretrial memorandum within 30 days of this
order is vacated. The Court will set a new deadline for the filing of Defendant’s pretrial
memorandum after April 15, 2013.
SO ORDERED:
/s/ Mary M. Lisi
Mary M. Lisi
Chief United States District Judge
March 14, 2013
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?