Alvarez v. Bechtel Corporation

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION

LUIS OMAR ALVAREZ, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CV421-087 ) BECHTEL CORPORATION, ) RICHMOND COUNTY ) CONSTRUCTION, ) SOUTHERN NUCLEAR ) OPERATING COMPANY, and ) WILLIAMS PLANT SERVICES, ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER Before the Court are plaintiff’s proposed discovery and scheduling plan and his motion to strike the proposal from the docket. Doc. 31; doc. 33. The Court construes the motion to strike as a motion to voluntarily withdraw the proposed discovery and scheduling plan. See Retic v. United States, 215 Fed. App’x 962, 964 (11th Cir. 2007) (“Federal courts sometimes will ignore the legal label that a pro se litigant attaches to a motion and recharacterize the motion in order to place it within a different legal category.” (quoting Castro v. United States, 540 U.S. 375, 381 (2003)). The discovery plan appears to have been filed in error, as it was not signed by all parties and was filed shortly after the Court stayed discovery, obviating its need. Doc. 30; doc. 31. As the proposal is unilateral and moot, the motion to withdraw is GRANTED. Doc. 33. SO ORDERED, this 15th day of June, 2021.

aw L. RAY( UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA