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, )

Download PDF
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

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?