5:23-cv-01178•Cooks v. Oklahoma City Police Department et al
Gesamter Gesetzestext
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA DONALD EUGENE COOKS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-23-1178-R ) TYLER ARNEY, et al., ) ) Defendant. ) ORDER Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, has submitted a notice [Doc. No. 57] indicating that he never received a copy of the Motion to Stay [Doc. No. 49] filed by Defendants and requesting permission to submit an objection out of time. Initially, the Court observes that the Motion to Stay reflects that it was mailed to Plaintiff’s address of record. See Kirby v. O'Dens, No. 14-CV-388-GKF-PJC, 2015 WL 2341535, at *3 (N.D. Okla. May 14, 2015) (“Service by mail is complete upon mailing. Mailing to a person’s last known address completes effective service, even if the mail is not received.”) (citations omitted). Additionally, although the Motion to Stay was unopposed, the Court granted the motion after considering the merits of Defendants’ arguments [Doc. No. 56]. In any event, if Plaintiff believes the stay is not warranted, he is permitted to file a motion seeking to lift the stay. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s filing [Doc. No. 57] is denied as moot. IT IS SO ORDERED this 23 rd day of January, 2025. Case 5:23-cv-01178-R Document 58 Filed 01/23/25 Page 1 of 1
Was bedeutet dieser Text für Ihre Situation?
Kostenlose und unverbindliche Beratung
Schildern Sie uns Ihre Situation. Unser Team meldet sich per E-Mail bei Ihnen für Ihre Beratung.
Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort
Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.