Timothy Marcus Mayberry v. Ron Neal, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana denied Timothy Marcus Mayberry’s motion for leave to file a third amended complaint, citing undue delay, prejudice, the advanced stage of discovery, and prior amendments. The court also denied Mayberry’s motion for a preliminary injunction concerning religiously prepared food and Ramadan nutrition, as well as his motion to take notice as unnecessary. The opinion addresses claims involving prison conditions, religious exercise, retaliation, and related procedural matters.

Holdings

1. Leave to amend was properly denied because the proposed amendment came at an advanced stage of the case after repeated amendments and substantial discovery, and allowing it would unduly prejudice the defendants and delay resolution.
2. The motion for a preliminary injunction was denied because the requested relief concerning Ramadan nutrition was unrelated to the claims in the operative complaint, and the remaining request presented no new arguments or evidence warranting a different result from the court's prior denial.
3. The motion was denied as unnecessary because it did not appear to request a court order or other judicial action, and the court was already generally aware of the filings in the case.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Mayberry should receive leave under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2) to file a third amended complaint adding retaliation, Ramadan nutrition, and Indiana Religious Freedom and Restoration Act claims.
2. Whether Mayberry was entitled to a preliminary injunction concerning food preparation and allegedly inadequate Ramadan nutrition.
3. Whether the court should take notice of the Warden's purported misrepresentations in prior filings.

Disposition

other