Andrews v. Bentley et al (INMATE 2)
Filing
19
ORDER: It is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court that: 1. The plaintiff's 15 Objections filed on 4/16/2013 to the Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge are overruled; 2. The Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 13 and [14 ]) are adopted; 3. The 3 Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed by the plaintiff is DENIED. 4. Plaintiff's challenges to the constitutionality of his conviction and/or sentence be DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to the provisions of 28 U .S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) as such claims are not properly before the court at this time. 5. Defendants' 6 Motion to Dismiss be GRANTED. 6. This case be DISMISSED prior to service of process pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Signed by Honorable Judge Truman M. Hobbs on 5/22/2013. (dmn, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
RICHARD WILLIAM ANDREWS,
Plaintiff,
v.
ROBERT BENTLEY, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. 2:13-cv-0071-TMH
[WO]
ORDER
After an independent review of the file, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT and DECREE
of the court that:
1.
The plaintiff's objections (Doc. #15) filed on April 16, 2013 to the
Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge are overruled;
2. The Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #13 &14) filed on April 3,
2013 are adopted;
3. The motion for preliminary injunction filed by the plaintiff (Doc. #3) is DENIED.
4. Plaintiff's challenges to the constitutionality of his conviction and/or sentence be
DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)
as such claims are not properly before the court at this time.
5. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 6) be GRANTED.
6. This case be DISMISSED prior to service of process pursuant to the provisions
of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii).
Done this the 22nd day of May, 2013.
/s/ Truman M. Hobbs
TRUMAN M. HOBBS
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?