IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION DeANDRE D. CURRINGTON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) ) v. ) CASE NO. 1:21-CV-550-WKW ) [WO] OFFICER SCOTT SOLTYS, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER Before the court is Plaintiff’s pro se motion to obtain appointment of counsel. (Doc. # 31.) Final judgment was entered on May 27, 2022 (Doc. # 22), the time for filing an appeal has expired (Doc. # 32), and Plaintiff has presented no meritorious grounds for reopening the case, see Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). In addition, before the court are Plaintiff’s motions to amend (Docs. # 35, 36, 37) and his application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. # 34). This action was dismissed without prejudice (Doc. # 22), so Plaintiff may refile his lawsuit with the court. Semtek Int’l Inc. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.,

, 505–06 (2001).1 But motions to amend (Docs. # 35, 36, 37) will not be entertained at this stage (i.e.,

1 Contrary to Plaintiff’s belief (Doc. # 36 at 2; Doc. # 37 at 2), he has not refiled his lawsuit with the court. when final judgment has been entered). Further, Plaintiff was already granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. # 3.)

For these reasons, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to obtain appointment of counsel (Doc. # 31) is DENIED, that his motions to amend (Docs. # 35, 36, 37) are DENIED, and that his application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc.

# 34) is DENIED as moot. DONE this 22nd day of June, 2023. /s/ W. Keith Watkins UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE