IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
Curtis
J Neeley Jr., MFA
v
CASE NO. 5:09-cv-05151
NameMedia
Inc.
Google Inc.
SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF SUPPORTING THE OBJECTION TO JOINT MOTION TO CERTIFY PREVENTING PLAINTIFF FROM PROCEEDING IN FORMA PAUPERIS ON APPEAL
1. Comes
now the Plaintiff respectfully, and reminds the Court that all pro se litigants are advised the Federal Rules of CP apply even to pro se parties. The motion to certify that the
Plaintiff is proceeding in bad faith would require that the Plaintiff realized
the appeal was futile yet continued simply for dilatory purposes or vexatious
purposes. The Plaintiff does not agree
with the ruling and would ask that it be explained better than ‘like last time’
when the rational for denial was not ever explained in the least contrary to
the intent of the Federal Rules of CP. The motions to amend that were
previously denied, Docket 186, described the rational and explained ‘Dennis
Factors’ as follows.
“As the Court has explained in an
Order entered on May 20, 2010 (docket entry #125), leave to amend may be denied
in the face of "repeated failure to cure deficiencies by amendments
previously allowed."
Dennis v. Dillard Department Stores,
Inc., 207 F.3d 523, 525 (8th Cir. 2000).
Reading the Order in Docket 125 and
searching for more detail the Plaintiff found as follows.
“When the Court
considers the Dennis factors, it concludes that the proposed
amendment should not be allowed, and that this case should go forward on the
basis of the Complaint and the amendments thereto which have already been
filed…”.
|