Opinion ID: 4238082
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 7

Heading: Redaction of Medical Records

Text: Mr. Moore asks us to remove the redactions on the medical records submitted by the defendants. These records proved immaterial for our analysis; thus, we deny Mr. Moore’s request. VIII. Mr. Moore’s Amended Opening Brief and Addendum Mr. Moore has filed an unauthorized “Amended Opening Brief” and a separate “Addendum.” Both are stricken. After successfully requesting an extension of time, Mr. Moore filed his opening appeal brief on July 18, 2017, and the defendants responded on August 11, 2018. He then requested an extension of time for his optional reply brief based in part on alleged restrictions to law library access. We extended the deadline to September 8, 2017, for the reply brief. But the clerk’s office received nothing from Mr. Moore for over three months. Then, on December 28, 2017, the clerk’s office received a 8 document purporting to be an amended opening brief. In this document, Mr. Moore stated that he was late in filing it because of restrictions on access to research books and word processors. This explanation is unconvincing. In the amended brief and his subsequent addendum, Mr. Moore purports to add multiple claims based on numerous events post-dating the deadline for his reply brief. Allowing the amended brief and addendum would require the defendants to respond to the new allegations, creating even further delay. Mr. Moore knew that he needed to seek an extension of time, as he has filed multiple motions for extensions. Indeed, in the last order granting an extension of time, the clerk’s office stated that “[n]o further extensions will be granted on the Clerk’s authority.” Order (Aug. 21, 2017). Because an extension of time is unwarranted, we direct the clerk to strike the amended brief and the addendum. Entered for the Court Robert E. Bacharach