Myers v. Adam's Smokehouse, LLC

• Court: District Court, E.D. Missouri
• Decided: September 2, 2025
• Docket: 4:25-cv-00860
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

ROBERT GLEN MYERS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Case No. 4:25-cv-00860-MTS ) ADAM’S SMOKEHOUSE, LLC, ) ) Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendant Adam’s Smokehouse, LLC’s unopposed* Motion to Dismiss. Doc. [6]. Largely for the reasons stated in Defendant’s Motion, the Court agrees that Plaintiff lacks standing to bring this action. See TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. 413, 423 (2021) (“To demonstrate their personal stake, plaintiffs must be able to sufficiently answer the question: ‘What’s it to you?’” (citing Scalia, The Doctrine of Standing as an Essential Element of the Separation of Powers, 17 Suffolk U. L. Rev. 881, 882 (1983))). Accordingly,

* Plaintiff specifically requested, and the Court specifically ordered, that he have through September 01, 2025, to file any opposition to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. He failed to do so. It is of no moment that September 01, 2025, was a federal holiday since the Court ordered that he file his response on a date certain. See J.C. v. Zimmerman, --- F.4th ---, No. 23-7492, 2025 WL 2325898, at *6 n.5 (2d Cir. Aug. 13, 2025) (“Rule 6 . . . do[es] not apply here because the district court imposed a specific date for compliance, rather than a period of time.”); Destra v. Demings, 725 F. App’x 855, 859 (11th Cir. 2018) (per curiam) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 advisory committee’s note to 2009 amendment); Violette v. P.A. Days, Inc., 427 F.3d 1015, 1016 (6th Cir. 2005). IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Adam’s Smokehouse, LLC’s unopposed Motion to Dismiss, Doc. [6], is GRANTED. An Order of Dismissal will be entered herewith. Dated this 2nd day of September 2025. Th adrinene T. SCHELP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

_2-