United States District Court, D. Maine
DAVID J. WIDI, JR., Plaintiff,
PAUL MCNEIL, et al., Defendants.
ORDER ON DAVID J. WIDI, JR.'S SECOND MOTION TO
ENLARGE TIME TO FILE OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS HICKEY AND
GRASSO'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ON COUNT
A. WOODCOCK, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
13, 2012, David J. Widi, Jr. filed a civil rights complaint
against a host of defendants, including Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Firearms (ATF) Agents Stephen E. Hickey, Jr. and Michael
Grasso. Compl. (ECF No. 1). On August 2, 2012, he
amended the complaint. Am. Compl. (ECF No. 15). In
the Amended Complaint, Mr. Widi made allegations against
Agents Hickey and Grasso, arising out of a search of his
residence on November 28, 2008. Id.
November 18, 2013, Mr. Widi filed a second amended complaint
but failed to file a motion for leave to amend the first
amended complaint. Second Am. Compl. (ECF No. 191).
On February 11, 2015, the Court issued an extensive order
and, as a result of that order, the Second Amended Complaint
became the operative complaint in this case. Screening
Order, Order Vacating in Part Earlier Order Den. Mot. for
Leave to File Second Am. Compl. as to Served Defs., Order
Granting in Part Mot. to File Second Am. Compl.,
Order Striking Portions of the Second Am. Compl., and Order
Den. Mot. to Stay (ECF No. 270).
Second Amended Complaint, specifically in Count VII, Mr. Widi
claimed that certain unnamed ATF and other law enforcement
agents unlawfully searched his grey trailer on November 28,
2008. Second Am. Compl. at 30. However, in its
February 11, 2015 screening order, the Court concluded that
Count VII should not go forward because of its scattershot
approach. Screening Order at 39. On May 4, 2015, Mr.
Widi filed a motion asking the Court to reconsider its
screening order. Mot. for Recons. (ECF No. 292)
(First Recons. Mot.). On December 8, 2015, the Court
issued a twenty-five page order denying Mr. Widi's motion
for reconsideration of its screening order and requiring Mr.
Widi to present documentary evidence supporting his
allegations. Order on Mot. for Recons. and Mot. Pursuant
to Fed.R.Civ.P. 60 (ECF No. 325) (First Recons.
March 24, 2016, Mr. Widi filed another motion for the Court
to reconsider its order denying his motion to reconsider its
screening order. Resp. to Order on Mot. for Recons. and
Mot. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 60 with Accompanying
Documentary Evid. and Mot. for Disc. (ECF No. 351)
(Mot. to Recons. Order on Mot. to Recons.). On
January 10, 2017, the Court issued a thirty-three page order,
granting the motion in part and denying it in part. Order
on Mot. for Recons. (ECF No. 392) (Second Recons.
Order). Acknowledging that Mr. Widi's allegations
against Agents Hickey and Grasso were “thin, ”
the Court nevertheless allowed Mr. Widi to proceed against
these Agents based on the allegation that the Agents had
opened up and photographed a motorcycle inside a grey trailer
on Mr. Widi's property for which there was no search
warrant. Id. at 19-20. On March 31, 2017, Agents
Grasso and Hickey answered the Second Amended Complaint.
Stephen E. Hickey, Jr.'s Answer to Second Am. Compl.
and Aff. Defenses (ECF No. 424); Michael
Grasso's Answer to Second Am. Compl. and Aff.
Defenses (ECF No. 425).
April 18, 2017, Agents Grasso and Hickey moved for summary
judgment and submitted a statement of undisputed material
facts. Stephen E. Hickey and Michael Grasso's Mot.
for Summ. J. on Count VII of the Second Am. Compl. (ECF
No. 428) (Defs.' Mot.); Statement of
Undisputed Material Facts (ECF No. 429) (DSMF). Mr.
Widi's responses were due on May 9, 2017. On May 22,
2017, Mr. Widi filed a motion to extend time to file his
opposition to the Grasso and Hickey motion for summary
judgment to June 30, 2017. Mot. to Enlarge Time to File
Opp'n to Defs. Hickey and Grasso's Mot. for Summ. J.
on Count VII (ECF No. 442). In the motion, Mr. Widi
stated that he had been unable to view a DVD upon which
Agents Grasso and Hickey were relying in their motion.
Id. at 1. On May 23, 2017, the Court issued an
interim order, asking Agents Grasso and Hickey to respond to
this portion of Mr. Widi's motion. Interim Order
(ECF No. 444). On the same day, Agents Grasso and Hickey
responded, confirming that the DVD had been sent to Mr. Widi
on April 18, 2017, and received by Federal Correctional
Institute Pollock on April 21, 2017, and a letter containing
an encrypted password for the DVD was mailed to Mr. Widi on
April 18, 2017, and received by FCI Pollock on April 24,
2017. Stephen E. Hickey and Michael Grasso's Resp. to
Mot. to Enlarge Time (ECF No. 442) and the Court's
Interim Order with Respect to Same (ECF No.
444) at 1-2 (ECF No. 445). On June 9, 2017, the Court
granted Mr. Widi's request for an extension until June
30, 2017. Order (ECF No. 452).
3, 2017, Mr. Widi filed a second motion to enlarge time,
asking that his opposition be due on July 30, 2017.
Second Mot. to Enlarge Time to File Opp'n to Defs.
Hickey and Grasso's Mot. for Summ. J. on Count VII
(ECF No. 457). Mr. Widi lists the following reasons for his
further extension: (1) he is laboring under a number of other
deadlines; (2) he has still been unable to view the DVD that
the attorney for Agents Hickey and Grasso had sent to him on
April 18, 2017; (3) he is awaiting a response to a discovery
request that he sent to counsel for Agents Hickey and Grasso
on March 6, 2017; and (4) once he is released from Bureau of
Prisons custody, he expects to return to the state of Maine,
where he claims he will be homeless. Id. at 1-4.
Court grants the motion to extend but only until July 28,
2017. The Court's reasoning is as follows: First, July
30, 2017, is a Sunday, and it is preferable to have the due
date fall on a weekday, not a weekend. Second, according to
Mr. Widi, he will be released from Bureau of Prisons custody
on July 7, 2017. Accordingly, he will have twenty-one
additional days from the date of release to file his
opposition in this Court, which-when combined with the
initial response time and the earlier extension-will give Mr.
Widi a grand total of 101 days to respond to the motion.
Third, the motion for summary judgment filed by Agents Hickey
and Grasso is compact, running less than four and a half
pages with only eighteen statements of material fact.
Defs.' Mot. at 1-5; DSMF ¶¶ 1-18.
Fourth, the Court will not accept in the future any excuses
from Mr. Widi about his inability to access the library, to
review the DVD, or similar matters involving Bureau of
Prisons policies, since he will no longer be incarcerated.
Fifth, the Court urges counsel and Mr. Widi to promptly
attend to the issue of discovery, which the Court is
concerned may delay the resolution of the motion for summary
judgment. Sixth, the Court reminds Mr. Widi that once he is
released from prison, it will be his obligation to provide
the Clerk and counsel with a current address. Seventh, the
Court also reminds Mr. Widi that once he is released from
prison, the mailbox rule will no longer apply to him and the
Court expects that he will comply with Court-ordered
deadlines by actually filing with the Clerk's Office
legal documents when they are due. Eighth, the Court will not
accept any excuses from Mr. Widi based on the innumerable
deadlines resulting from his prolific litigation. It was Mr.
Widi who chose to file these lawsuits and, like a busy lawyer
with many cases, Mr. Widi must find the time to comply with
the deadlines imposed by the Court. Finally, the Court
observes that Mr. Widi is not the only party to this case.
The Defendants have been awaiting resolution of this case for
over five years, and they too deserve to have the matter
resolved. In short, the Court is determined to move this
long-pending case to fruition.
Court GRANTS Mr. Widi's Second Motion to Enlarge Time to
File Opposition to Defendants Hickey and Grasso's Motion
for Summary Judgment on Count VII (ECF No. 457) in part and
DENIES it in part. The Court GRANTS David J. Widi's
motion only insofar as it requests an extension to July 28,