Santopietro v. OCA Inc et al, No. 2:2005cv02165 - Document 373 (E.D. La. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER & REASONS denying 371 Motion to Intervene. Signed by Chief Judge Sarah S. Vance on 9/15/2010. (Reference: Securities Cases)(rll, ) Modified on 9/15/2010 to edit doc type (rll, ).
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Santopietro v. OCA Inc et al Doc. 373 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA IN RE OCA, INC. SECURITIES AND DERIVATIVE LITIGATION CIVIL ACTION NO: 05-2165 SECTION: R(3) ORDER AND REASONS Before the Court is a motion to intervene and enforce consent degree by Patrick J. Simpson, Daniel Anthony Weymouth, Jonathan Lee Riches, Isony Akpan, Billy Driggers, Major Spaulding, George Barbour, and Jimmy O’Neal Brown (“Movants”).1 Movants state that they are inmates at the Federal Medical Center (“FMC”) in Lexington, Kentucky. Movants claim that they are being abused by certain individuals at FMC. These allegations are wholly unrelated to this class action, which was brought on behalf of all persons who purchased publicly traded common stock or sold put options of OCA, Inc. (“OCA”) during a particular time 1 R. Doc. 371. Dockets.Justia.com period. Movants do not contend that they are class members, and their assertion that the residential drug abuse program in which they participate is “financed and supported by OCA” is unsupported and irrelevant. Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b), the Court may permit anyone to intervene who “has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common question of law or fact.” Movants have made no such showing. Movants also move to enforce a purported consent decree, but no consent decree has been entered in this case. The motion is therefore frivolous. If Movants persist in attempting to assert wholly unrelated claims in this matter, appropriate sanctions will be imposed against them. For the foregoing reasons, Movants’ motion is DENIED. New Orleans, Louisiana, this ____ day of September, 2010. 15th _________________________________ SARAH S. VANCE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
