734 Rutland Avenue
Teancek, NJ 07666
814–880–9308
jph@psu.edu

February 9, 2011

Judge Richard J. Holwell
United States District Court
Southern District of New York
S. Courthouse
500 Pearl Street
New York, NY 10007

Re: Heicklen v. U. S. Department of Homeland Security et al.
10–CIV–02239 (RJH)(JLC)

Dear Judge Holwell:

    In an earlier communication you issued an ORDER that I was not to write to you.  However the other litigants do write to you.  I am entitled to equal treatment, so I am ignoring your ORDER so that I will be treated equally with the other litigants.

Plaintiff's Brief: Submittded January 27, 2010
Non-Receipt Notice to Court: April 28, 2010
Service Papers to court: Due date after June 11,2010; submitted June 11, 2010; Days Late, none
Defense Response: Due date; September 6, 2010;FRCP Rule 12(a)(1)(A)(ii); Submitted January 31, 2011; Days Late: 147 each
Plaintiff Reply; March 2. 2011
Disclosure: Due Date June 25, 2010;FRCP 7.1(b)(1), 26(a)(1)(A)(i), 26(a)(1)(C); Not submitted February 9, 211: Days Late >206

    The table above gives times due for disclosure and pleadings.  Full disclosure must be made within 14 days after service  [FRCP Rules 7.1(b)(1), 26(a)(1)(A)(i), and 26(a)(C)].  Nothing is required of Plaintiff to effect this action.  The federal defendants have complied.  The other Defendants have not.  Furthermore Plaintiff has asked the other defendants 3 times to provide names for their respective John Doe Defendants.  Has also asked the judge to order Defendants to comply both by mail and motion paper submissions.  There has been no response from the Defendants or the Judges.

    The defendants are required to submit response briefs within 60 days.  Both the federal and NY City Defendants filed their very lengthy pleas on January 31, 2011 (147 days late with permission).  Plaintiff has been ordered to reply to both by March 2, 2011. 

    This is impossible for Plaintiff to do.  Both the federal and New York City defendants have large government law firms to prepare briefs.  Defendant has only himself.  Furthermore, Plaintiff is not an attorney, and is not familiar with many of the laws and court decisions.  It will require some time for Plaintiff to read and study these documents.  To further complicate matters. Plaintiff has an extensive other life.  For example, he will be away from home on the following dates:

Travel schedule
2/9–13 Washington, DC
2/16–17 Harrisburg, PA
3/7–15 Southern FL
3/16–18 Louisville, KY
3/19–20 Tampa, FL
3/21–22 southern FL
4/7–10 Stateline, NV
4/11–16 Southern CA

    The normal reply  time for a plaintiff is 1/2 the time for defendant’s response.  By this standard, Plaintiff is entitled to 103-1/2 days to reply to each defendant’s response (207 days total).  Plaintiff will need a minimum of 120 days, excluding any time that he is incarcerated.  Currently there may be as many as 3 warrants for his arrest.  In likelihood there will be additional illegal arrests in the next few months, which will require a lengthening of the reply time.

    To complicate matters even further, the Defendants’ responses only address 6 of the 12 arrests in Plaintiff’s proposed expanded complaint. Plaintiff cannot prepare the expanded complaint until he receives the names of the John Doe Defendants and address where each can be served.

    The necessary order of business is:
The Court should properly serve Bellevue Medical Center to correct its mistake.
The names and contact addresses of all the John Doe defendants must be given to Plaintiff.
Plaintiff will prepare a new complaint which includes all 12 incidents.
Plaintiff will again serve all named Defendants with the addition of the John Doe Defendants and Michael Bloomberg, Mayor of New York City.  New York City Hospital and Saint Vincent’s Catholic Hospital and their named employees will be included as Defendants.
Defendants should be allowed to expand their responses to include all 12 incidents.
Plaintiff will then prepare a reply (or replies) to all the Defendants’ responses.

    Thank you for your expected cooperation.

Sincerely yours,



Julian Heicklen
Plaintiff
Counsel Pro Se

CC: James L. Cott, U. S. Magistrate Judge, U. S. District Court, Southern District of New York, U. S. Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007

Louis A. Pellegrino, Assistant U. S. Attorney, 86 Chambers Street, 3rd Floor, New York, NY 10007, 212–637–2689

Lesley Berson, Assistant Corporation Counsel, The City of New York, Law Department, 100 Church Street, New York, NY 10007, 202–788–0408

Pro Se Clerk, Room 230, U. S. District Court, Southern District of New York,
U. S. Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007