Burgess v. DOJI, INC. et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
MONSIEUR SHAWNELLIAS BURGESS,
Plaintiff,
v.
DOJI, INC, et al.,
Defendants.
Case No. 3:25-00495
Judge Aleta A. Trauger
Magistrate Judge Luke A. Evans
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Plaintiff has filed motions for “clarification,” for leave to file more motions to compel, and
for a modification of the scheduling order. (Doc. Nos. 248, 250, 268.) Stripped to their core, the
motions show that plaintiff wants to continue endless litigation over an issue that the May 28, 2026
conference definitely confirmed as absurd: Plaintiff was a patron of defendants for over 10 years
(Doc. No. 172 at 3); he knows the staff; he knows who served him on April 10, 2025 because he
was the customer and he was there; he would recognize his server immediately as soon as he
conducts her deposition; defendants have told him who served him; and yet he insists on endless
production of forensic evidence to confirm who served him. The motions also violate Local Rule
7.03. The Court denies the motions as frivolous and disproportionate to the needs of the case. The
corresponding motion for an extension of time to respond to Doc. No. 250 (Doc. No. 265) is denied
as moot.
Plaintiff has filed a motion for leave to file a sur-reply concerning the pending motion to
declare him a vexatious litigant. (Doc. No. 260.) The proposed sur-reply does not comply with
Local Rule 7.03. The proposed sur-reply also would add six more pages to the 18 pages that he
already has filed (Doc. No. 249) arguing that his continued fight for forensic confirmation of who
Case 3:25-cv-00495 Document 269 Filed 06/25/26 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>

2
served him on April 10, 2025 is not evidence of vexatiousness. The irony speaks for itself. The
Court denies the motion as frivolous and disproportionate to the needs of the case.
Conclusion
For the reasons above, the motions at Doc. Nos. 248, 250, 260, and 268 are DENIED as
frivolous. The motion at Doc. No. 265 is DENIED AS MOOT.
It is so ORDERED.
____________________________________
LUKE A. EVANS
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 3:25-cv-00495 Document 269 Filed 06/25/26 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>