JOHNSON v. COLVIN POST OFFICE

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE

ROBERT W. JOHNSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Docket No. 2:24-cv-00324-NT ) COLVIN POST OFFICE and ) JANE DOE, ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On September 19, 2024, the United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court, with a copy to the Plaintiff, her Recommended Decision after a preliminary review of the Plaintiff’s complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Recommended Decision (ECF No. 4). The time within which to file objections to the Recommended Decision has expired, and no objection has been filed. The Magistrate Judge notified the Plaintiff that failure to object would waive his right to de novo review and appeal. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED and the Plaintiff’s complaint (ECF No. 1) is DISMISSED. In addition, as the Magistrate Judge noted, Mr. Johnson appears to be a serial litigator in the federal courts, and he has filed at least three other cases in the District of Maine. See Johnson v. Waterville Health & Welfare, No. 1:24-cv-00303-NT; Johnson v. Reid, No. 2:24-cv-00301-NT, Johnson v. Trump, et al., No. 1:23-cv-00331-NT. This Court has previously issued a Cok1 warning to him, cautioning him that further groundless filings might result in the Court imposing filing restrictions. See Johnson v. Waterville Health & Welfare, No. 1:24-cv-00303-NT, 2024 WL 4388481 (D. Me. Oct.

2, 2024). The complaint in this case is yet another baseless filing. Accordingly, Mr. Johnson is hereby ENJOINED from filing new cases in the District of Maine without first obtaining the Court’s permission by showing that his proposed pleading is sufficiently plain and definite to satisfy Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8 and to warrant a response.

SO ORDERED. /s/ Nancy Torresen United States District Judge Dated this 17th day of October, 2024.

1 Cok v. Family Court of Rhode Island, 985 F.2d 32, 35 (1st Cir. 1993).