Lynn v. United States et al (INMATE 3)

Filing 8

ORDER; that the RECOMMENDATION 5 and SUPPLEMENTAL RECOMMENDATION 7 of the Magistrate Judge are ADOPTED; ORDERED as follows: 1. To the extent Plaintiff brings a Bivens action for alleged constitutional violations, such claims are DISMISSED with pr ejudice, prior to service of process, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A)(b)(1), as the complaint was not filed within the time prescribed by the applicable period of limitations; 2. to the extent Plaintiff seeks to assert claims u nder the Federal Tort Claims Act, his complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice, prior to service of process, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A)(b)(1), as this Court lacks jurisdiction over the complaint; 3. this case is DISMISSED, prior to service of process, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1915(A)(b)(1). A separate judgment shall issue. Signed by Honorable Truman M. Hobbs on 9/16/2010. (jg, )

L y n n v. United States et al (INMATE 3)

Doc. 8

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION THOMAS NEAL LYNN, JR., P la in ti ff , v. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) O RDER
T h e Magistrate Judge entered a Recommendation (Doc. #5) in this case, to which the P la in tif f filed Objections (Doc. #6) concerning the Magistrate Judge's construction of P la in tif f 's claims. Based on Plaintiff's objections, the Magistrate Judge entered a

CASE NO. 2:10-cv-142-TMH

UNITED STATES, et al., Defendants.

S u p p le m e n ta l Recommendation (Doc. #7) to which no timely objections have been filed. A f te r a review of the Recommendation and Supplemental Recommendation, and after an in d e p e n d en t review of the entire record, the Court believes that the Recommendation, as s u p p le m e n t e d , should be adopted. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the RECOMMENDATION (Doc. #5) and SUPPLEMENTAL R E C O M M E N D A T IO N (Doc. #7) of the Magistrate Judge are ADOPTED. It is further O R D E R E D as follows: 1. T o the extent Plaintiff brings a Bivens action for alleged constitutional v io la tio n s , such claims are DISMISSED with prejudice, prior to service of

Dockets.Justia.com

p ro c e ss , pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A)(b)(1), as the c o m p l a in t was not filed within the time prescribed by the applicable period of lim ita tio n s ; 2. to the extent Plaintiff seeks to assert claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act, h i s complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice, prior to service of process, p u r s u a n t to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(A)(b)(1), as this Court lacks ju ris d ic tio n over the complaint; and 3. th is case is DISMISSED, prior to service of process, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1 9 1 5 (A )(b)(1). A separate judgment shall issue. D o n e this 16th day of September, 2010.

/s / Truman M. Hobbs U N IT E D STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2