Pilson v. Bob's Motor's PPR

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma·Decided January 16, 2025·No. 5:23-cv-00676·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

DONALD PILSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. CIV-23-676-R ) BOB’S MOTORS PPR, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER

Before the Court is a letter submitted by Plaintiff describing his experience as an employee of 7-11, an entity that is not named in this action. This action was dismissed without prejudice on November 9, 2023 and Plaintiff’s letter does not appear to be seeking any form of post-judgment relief. Further, the Court advises Plaintiff that it does not consider letters as pleadings. See Green v. Dorrell, 969 F.2d 915, 917 (10th Cir. 1992) (“Although we construe [Plaintiff’s] pleadings liberally because he is a pro se litigant, he nevertheless must follow the same rules of procedure that govern other litigants.”). Any future filing must be formatted as a motion consistent with Local Civil Rule 7.1 or the Court will strike it from the record. IT IS SO ORDERED this 16th day of January 2025.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Pilson v. Bob's Motor's PPR, (W.D. Okla. 2025).

Pilson v. Bob's Motor's PPR (Pilson v. Bob's Motor's PPR) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Green v. Dorrell
969 F.2d 915 (Tenth Circuit, 1992)