Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Motions
Attorney(S)
Judges

Re: Al v. s, et al.

CHAMBERS OF SUSAN D. WIGENTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

NOT FOR PUBLICATION CHAMBERS OF SUSAN D. WIGENTON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Mr. Joseph Aruanno, #363
Special Treatment Unit
P.O. Box 905
Avenel, NJ 07001
Plaintiff
Gurbir S. Grewal, Esq.
Michael Vomacka, Esq.
Victoria Ply, Esq.
Office of the New Jersey Attorney General
25 Market Street
P.O. Box 112
Trenton, NJ 08625
Attorneys for Defendants
LETTER OPINION FILED WITH THE CLERK OF THE COURT Litigants:








Before this Court are Plaintiff Joseph Aruanno's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and/or Preliminary Injunction and Motion for Appointment of a Special Master. This Court having considered the parties' submissions and having reached its decision without oral argument pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78, and for the reasons discussed below, denies Plaintiff's motions. DISCUSSION

On August 16, 2017, Plaintiff filed motions for Restraining Order and/or Preliminary Injunction and for Appointment of a Special Master. (Dkt. No. 290.) On February 20, 2018, this Court denied Plaintiff's motions, noting that Plaintiff had failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits of his claim or irreparable harm if the relief he sought was denied. (Dkt. No. 301, 302.) This Court further held that Plaintiff had not identified any "exceptional condition" requiring the appointment of a special master in this case.

Plaintiff's current motions are identical to those he filed on August 16, 2017. (Compare Dkt. No. 290 to 307.) Therefore, for the reasons set forth in this Court's February 20, 2018 Letter Opinion and Order, Plaintiff's motions will be denied. CONCLUSION

The only discernable difference in the motions involve slight changes to what appears to be a cover letter to the Court. (Compare Dkt No. 290-4 to 307-4.) --------

For the reasons set forth above, Plaintiff's Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and/or Preliminary Injunction is DENIED. Plaintiff's Motion for Appointment of a Special Master is also DENIED. Plaintiff is ordered to cease filing motions in Civil Action Number 01-789 and Civil Action Number 04-3066, both of which are closed cases.

An appropriate Order will follow.

/s/ Susan D. Wigenton


SUSAN D. WIGENTON
, U.S.D.J. Orig: Clerk
cc: Parties


Steven C. Mannion, U.S.M.J.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Alves v. Ferguson
(Aug 1, 2018)