Reynolds v. Houston County Jail et al (INMATE 1)

Filing 24

ORDER: it is ORDERED that: 1) The 23 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED; 2) The dfts' 16 motion to dismiss is GRANTED to the extent the dfts seek dismissal of this case due to Plf's failure to properly exhaust the admi nistrative remedy previously available to him at the Houston County Jail prior to initiating this cause of action; 3) This case is DISMISSED with prejudice in accordance with the provisions of 42 USC 1997e(a) for Plf's failure to properly exhaust an administrative remedy before seeking relief from this court; 4) Other than the filing fee assessed in this case, no further costs are taxed herein. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 2/17/2021. (wcl, )

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
ANTWON J. REYNOLDS, #278484,
Plaintiff,
v.
HOUSTON COUNTY JAIL, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
) CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:17-CV-797-WHA
)
)
)
)
ORDER

On January 28, 2021, the Magistrate Judge entered a Recommendation (Doc.
#23) to which no timely objections have been filed. After an independent review of the
file and upon consideration of the Recommendation, it is ORDERED that:
1. The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED.
2. The defendants’ motion to dismiss is GRANTED to the extent the defendants
seek dismissal of this case due to Plaintiff’s failure to properly exhaust the administrative
remedy previously available to him at the Houston County Jail prior to initiating this cause
of action.
3. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice in accordance with the provisions of 42
U.S.C. § 1997e(a) for Plaintiff’s failure to properly exhaust an administrative remedy
before seeking relief from this court.
4. Other than the filing fee assessed in this case, no further costs are taxed herein.

A separate Final Judgment will be entered.
DONE this 17th day of February, 2021.

/s/ W. Harold Albritton
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2