Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Horob v. Watters

United States District Court, D. Montana, Billings Division

February 1, 2018

TODD KENNETH HOROB, Plaintiff,
v.
JUDGE SUSAN P. WATTERS, Defendant.

          ORDER ON FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND OTHER MOTIONS

          ROBERT J. BRYAN United States District Judge.

         This matter comes before the Court on the Findings and Recommendations (“Report”) of U.S. Magistrate Judge Timothy J. Cavan. Dkt. 15. The Court has considered the pleadings filed regarding the report and the remaining record.

         On October 6, 2017, Plaintiff, a pro se prisoner in federal custody at the Federal Correction Complex Allenwood Low in White Deer, Pennsylvania, filed a proposed complaint and application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). Dkt. 1. In his proposed complaint, Plaintiff asserts that U.S. District Judge Susan P. Watters has held him “in false custody, ” and as a result, he was sexually assaulted. Id.

         On November 29, 2017, the Report was issued from the United States Magistrate Judge assigned to the case. Dkt. 15. The facts and procedural history are in the Report (Dkt. 15, at 1-2) and are adopted here. The Report recommends dismissal of the case because Judge Watters is entitled to absolute judicial immunity and because Plaintiff's claims challenge the fact or duration of his confinement, and so are barred by Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994). Dkt. 15. Plaintiff was given fourteen days to file objections. Id.

         On December 4, 2017, Plaintiff filed a “Motion to Proceed, ” in which he asserted that Judge Watters “lied to hold [him] in federal custody.” Dkt. 17. On December 5, 2017, Plaintiff filed a “Motion to the Court for Help, ” alleging that the prison has denied him necessary medical care and food. Dkt. 18. Plaintiff also reiterated his claim that Judge Watters lied and he uses various slurs against her. Id. He maintained that Judge Watters wants him to die, which is why he is getting no medical attention. Id.

         On December 12, 2017, Plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time to file objections to the Report and Recommendation. Dkt. 20. Plaintiff asserted that he has “a very serious medical condition . . . [he] is starving and is in a lot of pain from the assault.” Id. He maintained that he “can't object in this kind of condition, ” and so “demands extension to object.” Id.

         On December 13, 2017, the case was reassigned to the undersigned. Dkt. 21.

         Plaintiff's first motion for an extension of time to file objections was granted, and he was given until January 5, 2018 to file his objections, if any. Dkt. 22. The Report, (Dkt. 15), and the other pending motions, “Motion to Proceed, ” (Dkt. 17) and the “Motion to the Court for Help” (Dkt. 18) were renoted for consideration for January 5, 2018. Id.

         On January 2, 2018, Plaintiff filed a “Motion for Video Hearing, ” so that Plaintiff could explain why Judge Watters can be sued. Dkt. 24. He makes reference to filing another “§ 2255 petition.” Id. That same day, Plaintiff filed a “Motion for Extension, ” stating that he “is in Terre Haute in being transported for medical attention” and needs more time to file objections. Dkt. 23. He did not specify how much time he needed to file the objections. Id.

         Plaintiff's “Motion for Extension” (Dkt. 23) was granted, and he was given to January 26, 2018, to file objections, if any to the Report. Dkt. 25.

         On January 12, 2018, Plaintiff filed this third motion for extension of time. Dkt. 27. In this motion, Plaintiff stated “objection is due Jan - 5 - 2018.” Id. He again stated that he “cannot object by Jan - 5- 2018” because he was “being transferred for medical care, ” and was “unable to file objection at this time because of medical condition.” Id. He asked for an “extension to object.” Id.

         On January 16, 2018, Plaintiff's third motion for an extension of time to file objections (Dkt. 27) was denied. Dkt. 28. Plaintiff was reminded that his objections, if any, were due by January 26, 2018. Id.

         On January 22, 2018, Plaintiff filed a notice of change of address. Dkt. 29. He requested that the Clerk of the Court send copies of orders from the case. Id. Plaintiff also noted that “objections still needs to be filed.” Id.

         That same day, the Clerk of the Court mailed Plaintiff copies of the three orders issued in the case since the case was assigned to the undersigned (Dkts. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.