ROSS v. CONNER, 1:14-cv-98-FDW. (2014)
Court: District Court, W.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20141203b88
Visitors: 6
Filed: Dec. 02, 2014
Latest Update: Dec. 02, 2014
Summary: ORDER FRAND D. WHITNEY, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's "Motion Requesting Federal Criminal Procedure Rules Concerning 1983 Civil Complaint and Motion Requesting Proof of Service," (Doc. No. 18). In support of his motion, Plaintiff states that he would like for the Court to rule on his prior Motion Requesting Proof of Service, and on his prior Motion Requesting Federal Criminal Procedure Rules Concerning 1983 Civil Complaint. Plaintiff's "Motion Requesting Fede
Summary: ORDER FRAND D. WHITNEY, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's "Motion Requesting Federal Criminal Procedure Rules Concerning 1983 Civil Complaint and Motion Requesting Proof of Service," (Doc. No. 18). In support of his motion, Plaintiff states that he would like for the Court to rule on his prior Motion Requesting Proof of Service, and on his prior Motion Requesting Federal Criminal Procedure Rules Concerning 1983 Civil Complaint. Plaintiff's "Motion Requesting Feder..
More
ORDER
FRAND D. WHITNEY, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff's "Motion Requesting Federal Criminal Procedure Rules Concerning 1983 Civil Complaint and Motion Requesting Proof of Service," (Doc. No. 18). In support of his motion, Plaintiff states that he would like for the Court to rule on his prior Motion Requesting Proof of Service, and on his prior Motion Requesting Federal Criminal Procedure Rules Concerning 1983 Civil Complaint.
Plaintiff's "Motion Requesting Federal Criminal Procedure Rules Concerning 1983 Civil Complaint and Motion Requesting Proof of Service," (Doc. No. 18), is DENIED, as the Court has already ruled on his prior Motion Requesting Proof of Service. See (Doc. No. 17). Furthermore, there is no pending "Motion Requesting Federal Criminal Procedure Rules Concerning 1983 Civil Complaint" filed by Plaintiff. In any event, this Court is not obligated to provide Plaintiff with the procedural rules for filing a Section 1983 action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
