Ward v. Little et al (INMATE 2)

Filing 8

ORDER; that 1. The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge 7 be and the same ishereby ADOPTED, APPROVED, and AFFIRMED; 2. The Plaintiff's complaint 1 against the Defendants challenging events which occurred on or about June 14, 2005 be and th e same is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice as further set out; 3. The Plaintiff's state law claim(s) be and the same are hereby DISMISSED without prejudice; 4. The Plaintiff's complaint 1 be and the same is hereby DISMISSED prior to service of process. Signed by Honorable Ira De Ment on 8/31/2010. (jg, )

Ward v. Little et al (INMATE 2)

Doc. 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA N O R T H E R N DIVISION

R U P E R T WARD, JR., #251 750 P la in tiff, v. C H A S E LITTLE, et al., D e fe n d a n ts .

) ) ) ) CASE NO. 2:10-cv-532-ID ) (W O ) ) ) ) )

ORDER
O n July 26, 2010, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case to w h ic h no timely objections have been filed. (Doc. # 7). Upon an independent review of th e file in this case and upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Magistrate J u d g e , it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that 1. The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #7) be and the same is h e re b y ADOPTED, APPROVED, and AFFIRMED; 2. The Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. #1) against the Defendants challenging events w h ic h occurred on or about June 14, 2005 be and the same is hereby DISMISSED with p re ju d ic e pursuant to the directives of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) because the Plaintiff fa ile d to file the complaint with regard to these allegations within the time prescribed by th e applicable period of limitation; 3 . The Plaintiff's state law claim(s) be and the same are hereby DISMISSED

1

Dockets.Justia.com

without prejudice; and 4. The Plaintiff's complaint (Doc. #1) be and the same is hereby DISMISSED p rio r to service of process. D o n e this the 31st day of August, 2010.

/s/ Ira DeMent SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2