Montague v. Bell et al (INMATE3)

Filing 44

ORDER ADOPTING 43 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and it is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. The Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED to the extent the Defendants seek dismissal of this case based on Montague's failure to exhaust all administrative remedies available to him at FPC Montgomery through the BOP's administrative remedy program. 2. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice in accordance with the provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) because of Montagues failure to exhaust the BOPs administrative remedies during his confinement at FPC Montgomery. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 1/10/2014. (dmn, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION

RUSSELL MONTAGUE,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
vs.
LIEUTENANT BELL, et al.,
Defendants.

CASE NO. 2:11cv-256-WHA
(WO)

ORDER
On December 17, 2013, the Magistrate Judge entered a Recommendation (Doc. #43) in
this case, to which no timely objection has been filed.
Following an independent review of the file in this case, the court ADOPTS the
Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and it is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1. The Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED to the extent the
Defendants seek dismissal of this case based on Montague’s failure to exhaust all administrative
remedies available to him at FPC Montgomery through the BOP’s administrative remedy
program.
2. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice in accordance with the provisions of 42
U.S.C. § 1997e(a) because of Montague’s failure to exhaust the BOP’s administrative remedies
during his confinement at FPC Montgomery.
DONE this 10th day of January, 2014.

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