Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01459-CMA-KLM
07-16-2012
LORAL HUFFMAN, Plaintiff, v. DR. ALLRED, DR. CARTER, SANCHEZ, Case Manager, DERR, Unit Manager, JOHN DOE, Mailroom Supervisor, JANE DOE, Food Supervisor, BUCKNER, Investigator, LINCOLN, D.H.O., and CRANK, Trust Manager, Defendants.
MINUTE ORDER
ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE KRISTEN L. MIX
This matter is before the Court on thirteen motions submitted by Plaintiff [Docket Nos. 251 through 263; Filed July 12, 2012] (the "Motions").
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motions are STRICKEN pursuant to D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1H and the Court's "inherent power to impose a variety of sanctions on litigants in order to regulate its docket, promote judicial efficiency, and deter frivolous filings." E.g., McMurray v. McCelmoore, 445 F. App'x 43, 45 (10th Cir. 2011) (affirming district court's imposition of filing restrictions against abusive litigant). The Motions are largely undecipherable (as is Plaintiff's pattern of filing in this matter), imponderous, and at times contradictory. For example, Plaintiff expresses his intent to proceed with this matter [#258], then asks for a 60-day stay in two separate filings [## 261, 262].
Further, the Motions are in large part duplicative of Plaintiff's previous requests that the Court has already resolved. See Minute Orders, [## 108, 128, 137, 149, 163, 192, 203, 213, 222, 237, 245, 248].
Regarding Plaintiff's allegation that he is being "packed up," the Court notes that the Federal Bureau of Prisons Inmate Locator indicates that Plaintiff remains incarcerated at the Federal Correctional Institution (Low) in Coleman, Florida, which is the address presently reflected on the docket.
The Court may take judicial notice of its own files and records, as well as of facts which are a matter of public record. St. Louis Baptist Temple, Inc. v. FDIC, 605 F.2d 1169, 1172 (10th Cir. 1979).
The Court reminds Plaintiff for the third time that his failure to timely respond to the two pending dispositive motions will result in a Recommendation that this matter be dismissed. See [#237] (first time); [#245] (second time). Plaintiff's responses are due on or before July 20, 2012.