Scheit v. Schmaling et al

Filing 97

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge William E Duffin on 3/11/2025 GRANTING 78 Defendant Latisha Ramus's Motion for Summary Judgment; and GRANTING 85 Defendant Christopher Schmaling's Motion for Summary Judgment. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Judgment to be entered. (cc: all counsel and mailed to pro se Plaintiff)(lz)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
ANGELA A. SCHEIT,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 22-CV-1138

CHRISTOPHER SCHMALING, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER
On November 18, and November 20, 2024, the defendants filed motions for
summary judgment on the merits. (ECF Nos. 78, 85.) On November 18, and
November 21, 2024, the court issued two notices and orders informing pro se
plaintiff Angela A. Scheit that she had until December 18 and December 20, 2024,
respectively, to file responses to the defendants’ motions for summary judgment
motion. (ECF Nos. 84, 91.) In both notices and orders the court cautioned Scheit
that if by those dates she did not respond to the motions or file a letter explaining
why she was unable to do so the court would accept all facts asserted by the
defendants as undisputed.
On December 6, 2024, Scheit filed a motion for extension of time to respond to
both motions for summary judgment. (ECF No. 93.) The court granted the motion,
making Scheit’s deadline to respond to both motions February 20, 2025. (ECF No.
94.)

The February 20, 2025, deadline has passed and Scheit has not filed
responses to either summary judgment motion. As such, the court will construe the
motions as unopposed. The court has reviewed the defendants’ motions, briefs in
support, and the undisputed facts, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e)(2), and concludes that
they are entitled to summary judgment on the merits. The case is dismissed.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the defendants’ motions for summary
judgment (ECF No. 78, 84) are GRANTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED with
prejudice. The Clerk of Court will enter judgment accordingly.
This order and the judgment to follow are final. A dissatisfied party may
appeal this court’s decision to the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit by filing
in this court a notice of appeal within 30 days of the entry of judgment. See Federal
Rule of Appellate Procedure 3, 4. This court may extend this deadline if a party
timely requests an extension and shows good cause or excusable neglect for not
being able to meet the 30-day deadline. See Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure
4(a)(5)(A).
Under certain circumstances a party may ask this court to alter or amend its
judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) or ask for relief from
judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). Any motion under Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) must be filed within 28 days of the entry of judgment.
The court cannot extend this deadline. See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(2).
Any motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) must be filed within a
2

reasonable time, generally no more than one year after the entry of the judgment.
The court cannot extend this deadline. See Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(2).
A party is expected to closely review all applicable rules and determine what, if any,
further action is appropriate.

Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin this 11th day of March, 2025.
BY THE COURT

WILLIAM E. DUFFIN
United States Magistrate Judge

3