1:19-cv-00206•Cox v. Quick
Gesamter Gesetzestext
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION MICHAEL E. COX, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Case No. 1:19-cv-0206-MTS ) BENJAMIN QUICK, ) ) Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM AND ORDER The Court dismissed this action without prejudice more than fifty-seven months ago. Doc. [34]. This closed matter is back before the Court on pro se Plaintiff Michael E. Cox’s Motion to Reopen Case under Rule 60(b). Doc. [36]; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). The Court has reviewed the Motion in its entirety along with the docket of this case. After due consideration, the Court will deny Plaintiff’s Motion. First, Plaintiff failed to make his Motion within a reasonable time. Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(c). Second, and in any event, Plaintiff has failed to show the existence of “just terms” to relieve him from the Court’s dismissal of this action without prejudice under Rule 41(b). Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b); see Cohen v. Hoyer, 32 F. App’x 755, 759–60 (7th Cir. 2002) (unsigned order). Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Michael E. Cox’s Motion to Reopen Case under Rule 60(b), Doc. [36], is DENIED. Dated this 4th day of February 2026. MATTHEW T. SCHELP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Case: 1:19-cv-00206-MTS Doc. #: 38 Filed: 02/04/26 Page: 1 of 1 PageID #: <pageID>
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.