Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de66> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 9 of
9
with 100 items per page.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de66 RegisterActionDate "2018-05-10" @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de66 RegisterActionDescriptionText "Text Order: Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of the denial of his motion for a preliminary injunction is denied (d/e 46 ) for the reasons stated in the order denying Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. Plaintiff's renewed motion for counsel is denied (d/e 49 ) for the reasons stated in the Court's 3/20/18 order. Additionally, Plaintiff has his G.E.D. and has earned some college classes. (d/e 49 , 5.) Plaintiff has been able to obtain and use relevant evidence, as evidenced by his submission of the 1,400-some pages of initial disclosures provided by Defendants which were submitted with Plaintiff's motion for counsel. Plaintiff has also been able to send discovery requests to defense counsel. Clearly Plaintiff disagrees with his mental health diagnoses, but that does not mean he is unable to proceed pro se. Plaintiff asserts that his mental health records support the appointment of counsel, but he does not point to any document that supports that conclusion. The Court has not reviewed all 1,400 pages of documents submitted by Plaintiff (kept on a CD in the vault), but a 10/2/17 mental health progress note diagnoses Plaintiff with mild depression and states that Plaintiff was cooperative, oriented, and had a clear/coherent thought process. A 9/21/17 mental health progress notes finds the same, with no evidence of psychotic process. A 9/17/17 note diagnosis Plaintiff with "unspecified disruptive, impulse-control, and conduct disorder." These notes do not suggest that Plaintiff is unable to proceed pro se. Plaintiff still appears competent to proceed pro se in light of the relatively straightforward inquiry regarding whether Defendants were deliberately indifferent. Pruitt v. Mote, 503 F.3d 647, 653 (7th Cir. 2007); Ledford v. Sullivan, 105 F.3d 354, 359 (7th Cir. 1997). This case is not about what other mental health professionals might do. Snipes v. DeTella, 95 F.3d 586, 591 (7th Cir. 1996). On a separate matter, Defendants' motion to extend their deadline to file a dispositive motion on exhaustion to May 14, 2018, is granted. (d/e 48 .) Defendants' motion to extend their response deadline for Plaintiff's discovery requests are granted. (d/es 50 , 53 .) Defendants' responses to Plaintiff's outstanding discovery requests are due June 4, 2018. Entered by Judge Sue E. Myerscough on 05/10/2018. (SKN, ilcd) (Entered: 05/10/2018)" @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de66 AdministrativeID "None" @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de66 OntologyLabel order @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de66 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de57 @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de66 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de59 @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de66 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de60 @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de66 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de61 @default.
- ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de66 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilcd;;1:17-cv-01288_de64 @default.