NOT PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ___________ No. 22-3254, 22-3327 and 23-1187 __________ GREGORY I. EZEANI, Appellant v. BRIDGETT KELLY, Union County College Human Resources Division ____________________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. Civil Action No. 2-22-cv-06164) District Judge: Honorable Brian R. Martinotti ____________________________________ GREGORY I. EZEANI, Appellant v. JEFFREY S. MCCLAIN ____________________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. Civil Action No. 2-22-cv-06163) District Judge: Honorable Brian R. Martinotti ____________________________________ GREGORY I. EZEANI, Appellant v. WILLIAM ANDERSON, Warden, Essex County Corrections; CFG HEALTH SYSTEMS LLC ____________________________________ On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (D.C. Civil Action No. 2-21-cv-06759) District Judge: Honorable Brian R. Martinotti ____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a) July 3, 2023 Before: JORDAN, CHUNG, and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed: July 3, 2023) ___________ OPINION* ___________ PER CURIAM In these consolidated cases, pro se litigant Gregory Ezeani appeals from orders entered by the District Court in three different actions: the District Court’s dismissal of his action against William Anderson due to his failure to comply with Court orders (the Anderson action); the District Court’s dismissal of his complaint raising claims against Bridgett Kelly (the Kelly action); and the District Court’s dismissal of his complaint raising claims against Jeffrey McClain (the McClain action). For the reasons that follow, we will affirm. * This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent. 2 I. Each of Ezeani’s complaints raised claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. First, in March 2021, Ezeani filed a complaint against Anderson, the Warden of Essex County Correctional Facility. In that complaint, Ezeani argued that he was inadequately treated for diabetes during his ten-month detention in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) custody. During protracted discovery proceedings that spanned approximately fourteen months, Ezeani failed to comply with various discovery obligations, discussed in greater detail below. Eventually, the Magistrate Judge recommended dismissing Ezeani’s action against Anderson with prejudice for failure to adhere to his discovery obligations in violation of Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b), and failure to comply with rules and court orders in violation of Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). In January 2023, after conducting a thorough Poulis1 analysis, the District Court adopted the Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation and dismissed Ezeani’s action against Anderson with prejudice. In October 2022, while the Anderson action remained ongoing, Ezeani initiated two more civil actions: one against Kelly, an employee of Union County College’s Human Resources Department (where Ezeani was previously employed), and another against McClain, an attorney who represented a defendant in the Anderson action. Ezeani alleged that McClain had improperly subpoenaed his employment records – and Kelly had improperly disclosed them – in the Anderson action without obtaining his consent, which violated his due process rights. 1 Poulis v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 747 …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals