Saub v. Western Tidewater Regional Jail et al

Filing 20

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr on 07/30/2018. Copy mailed to plaintiff.(tjoh, )

Download PDF
j"~r~¥ IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT | JUL 0 ? o FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division '' I CLERioIsrDisfRicf^ Richmond, va ERIC B. SAUB, Plaintiff, V. Civil Action No. 3:17CV617 WESTERN TIDEWATER REGIONAL JAIL,et aL, Defendants. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, a Virginia inmate proceeding pro se, filed this action. By Memorandum Order entered on March 2, 2018, the Court directed Plaintiff to submit a particularized complaint within fourteen (14) days of the date of entry thereof. Thereafter, the Court granted Plaintiff two extensions of time. (EOF Nos. 12, 15.) Specifically, by Memorandum Order entered on May 8, 2018, the Court directed Plaintiff to file his particularized complaint within thirty (30) days of the date of entry thereof. (EOF No. 15.) More than thirty (30) days elapsed after the entry of the May 8, 2018 Memorandum Oder and the Court failed to receive a particularized complaint from Plaintiff. Accordingly, by Memorandum Opinion and Order entered on June 12, 2018, the Court dismissed the action without prejudice. (ECFNo. 16, 17.) On Jime 21, 2018, the Court received a Motion to Reopen Case from Plaintiff("Motion to Reopen," ECF No. 18.) In the Motion to Reopen, Plaintiff swears that he timely mailed a copy of his Particularized Complaint to the Court. Plaintiff attaches a copy of the Particularized Complaint (ECF No. 18-3.) Given these circumstances, the Motion to Reopen (ECF No. 18) will be GRANTED. The June 12, 2018 Memorandum Opinion and Order will be VACATED and the Court will continue to process the action. Plaintiffs Rule 60(b) Motion to Reopen(EOF No. 19) will be DENIED AS MOOT. An appropriate Order will accompany this Memorandum Opinion. Date: Richmond, Virginia John A. Gibney, Jr. United States Districttl tige

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?