Gorak, Gregory v. Paquin, John et al

Filing 19

ORDER that plaintiff's 18 response to the answer will be placed in the court's file but will not be considered. Signed by Magistrate Judge Stephen L. Crocker on 7/13/2011. (jef),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
_________________________________________________________________________________________
GREGORY GORAK
ORDER
Plaintiff,
v.

11-cv-130-bbc

JOHN PAQUIN, RICK RAEMISCH,
RUSSELL BAUSCH and KAREN SOLOMAN,
Defendants.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
On May 9, 2011, the court reopened this case and granted plaintiff leave to proceed on his
claim that defendants violated his right to due process by refusing to allow him to call witnesses at
his December 2008 disciplinary hearing.

On June 15, 2011, defendants answered plaintiff’s

complaint, raising various affirmative defenses. Now plaintiff has filed a response to the answer in
which he replies to several factual statements made in the answer.
Plaintiff does not need to be concerned: although defendants have raised affirmative defenses
in their answer as placeholders, they have not filed an actual motion to dismiss. Therefore, plaintiff
does not need to reply to the answer. If defendants later file a motion to dismiss, then plaintiff will
be allowed to respond to that motion. In the meantime, Rules 7(a) and 8(b)(6) of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure work together to protect plaintiff from defendants’ claims in the answer. Because
of those rules, this court does not need plaintiff to reply to the answer; instead, the court
automatically assumes that plaintiff has denied the factual statements and affirmative defenses raised
in that answer.
Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that plaintiff’s reply to the answer, dkt. 18, will be placed in
the court’s file but will not be considered.

Entered this 13 th day of July, 2011.
BY THE COURT:
/s/
STEPHEN L. CROCKER
Magistrate Judge