Morris v. Hughs (INMATE 2)

Filing 20

ORDERED as follows: 1) The 19 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED; 2) Dfts' 17 motion to dismiss is GRANTED to the extent Dfts seek dismissal based upon Plf's failure to exhaust an administrative remedy available to him at the Houston County Jail prior to initiating this cause of action; 3) This case is DISMISSED with prejudice under 42 USC 1997e(a) for Plf's failure to exhaust an administrative remedy previously available to him; and 4) No costs are taxed. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 10/12/2016. (wcl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
STEVEN PAUL MORRIS,
#192581,
Plaintiff,
v.
HOUSTON COUNTY JAIL C.O.,
MRS. HUGHES, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 1:16-CV-297-WKW
[WO]

ORDER
Before the court is the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. (Doc. # 19.)
There being no timely objection filed to the Recommendation, and based on a review
of the record, it is ORDERED as follows:
1.

The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 19) is

ADOPTED;
2.

Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doc. # 17) is GRANTED to the extent

Defendants seek dismissal based upon Plaintiff’s failure to exhaust an administrative
remedy available to him at the Houston County Jail prior to initiating this cause of
action;

3.

This case is DISMISSED with prejudice under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) for

Plaintiff’s failure to exhaust an administrative remedy previously available to him;
and
4.

No costs are taxed.

A final judgment will be entered separately.
DONE this 12th day of October, 2016.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2