Bloom v. Campbell

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-10339-RGS
GARY MICHAEL BLOOM,
Plaintiff
v.
WILLIAM JAMES CAMPBELL, III,
Defendant
ORDER ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S
MOTION TO STRIKE AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES AND
FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS
November 19, 2025
STEARNS, D.J.
Pro se plaintiff, attorney Gary Bloom, in this contentious case involving
an 	attorney-client/partnership 	agreement 	turned 	sour, 	now 	moves 	for
judgment on the pleadings. 	He also asks that the court strike defendant
William Campbell’s affirmative defenses. 	In a carefully considered Report,
Magistrate Judge Boal recommends that the district court deny plaintiff
Bloom’s 	motion 	as 	untimely 	under Fed. 	R. Civ. 	P. 	12(f). 	She 	further
recommends that the motion for judgment on the pleadings on five of
Campbell’s affirmative defenses be denied as Campbell has plead them with
sufficient clarity to satisfy the “short and plain” requirements of Fed. R. Civ.
Case 1:24-cv-10339-RGS Document 157 Filed 11/19/25 Page 1 of 2

P. 8(a)(2). 	As Magistrate Judge Boal’s conclusions are correct regarding
both motions, the court will adopt her Recommendations that that the
motions be denied.
ORDER
The 	Recommendations 	of 	the 	Magistrate 	Judge 	are 	ADOPTED.
Bloom’s motions for judgment on the pleadings and to strike affirmative
defenses (Dkt# 94 are) DENIED.1
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Richard G. Stearns__________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
1 On October 25, 2025, Bloom filed timely Objections to the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendations. 	The Objections raise no arguments
that were not (or could not have been) raised in the proceedings before the
Magistrate Judge and thus merit no further consideration.
Case 1:24-cv-10339-RGS Document 157 Filed 11/19/25 Page 2 of 2