From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stokes v. Aramark Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
May 25, 2021
Civ. No. 19-20601 (NLH) (AMD) (D.N.J. May. 25, 2021)

Opinion

Civ. No. 19-20601 (NLH) (AMD)

05-25-2021

GEORGE STOKES, et al., Plaintiff, v. ARAMARK CORPORATION, et al., Defendants.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

The Court previously afforded Plaintiff two extensions to file an amended complaint on November 17, 2020 and January 12, 2021. ECF Nos. 18, 22. In the January 21, 2021 Order granting a second extension, the Court explicitly stated that the second extension was the final one, and that the failure to submit a proposed second amended complaint by February 19, 2021 would result in dismissal with prejudice. ECF No. 22.

On February 22, 2021, the Court received a letter postmarked February 16, 2021, requesting another extension due to Covid-19-related delays, specifically to "[d]aily functions and mail," as well as quarantine precautions. ECF No. 23. Plaintiff's request will be denied.

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS on this 25th day of May, 2021

ORDERED that the amended complaint, ECF No. 6, is dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); and it is further

ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Opinion and Order upon Plaintiffs by regular U.S. mail and mark this case closed.

s/ Noel L. Hillman

NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J. At Camden, New Jersey


Summaries of

Stokes v. Aramark Corp.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
May 25, 2021
Civ. No. 19-20601 (NLH) (AMD) (D.N.J. May. 25, 2021)
Case details for

Stokes v. Aramark Corp.

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE STOKES, et al., Plaintiff, v. ARAMARK CORPORATION, et al.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Date published: May 25, 2021

Citations

Civ. No. 19-20601 (NLH) (AMD) (D.N.J. May. 25, 2021)

Citing Cases

Stokes v. Denson

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Defendants assert Plaintiff accumulated strikes in six actions: Stokes v. Aramark …