Clegg v. Thomas et al (INMATE 2)
ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE that the directive in the court's June 7, 2013 order directing payment of the filing fee from Plaintiff's inmate account 8 be SUSPENDED. The Clerk is DIRECTED to send a copy of this Orde r to the account clerk at the Elmore Correctional Facility. It is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that: 1. Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss 11 be GRANTED; 2. This case be DISMISSED without prejudice; and 3. No costs or fees be taxed in this case Objections to R&R due by 7/5/2013. Signed by Honorable Judge Terry F. Moorer on 6/19/2013. (jg, ) copy mailed to acct clerk at Elmore Corr. Facility.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
JEFFREY SCOTT CLEGG, #276 457,
MR. KIM THOMAS, et al.,
) CIVIL ACTION NO.: 2:13-CV-283-TMH
ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Before the court is Plaintiff’s motion to dismiss complaint without cost. Plaintiff
asserts that he fears retribution from the Alabama Department of Corrections if he continues
to prosecute this action which he claims may impact his ability to be paroled. Upon
consideration of Plaintiff’s motion, the court concludes that the motion is due to be granted.
Furthermore, since the complaint has not been served, the court finds that this case is due to
be dismissed without prejudice. See Rule 41(a)(1), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Additionally, the court will direct that its June 7, 2013 order (Doc. No. 8) directing payment
of the filing fee from Plaintiff’s inmate account be suspended.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the directive in the court’s June 7, 2013 order
directing payment of the filing fee from Plaintiff’s
inmate account (Doc. No. 8) be
The Clerk is DIRECTED to send a copy of this Order to the account clerk at the
Elmore Correctional Facility.
It is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 11) be GRANTED;
2. This case be DISMISSED without prejudice; and
3. No costs or fees be taxed in this case .
It is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff may file an objection to the Recommendation on or before
July 5, 2013. Any objection filed must specifically identify the findings in the Magistrate
Judge's Recommendation to which Plaintiff objects. Frivolous, conclusive or general
objections will not be considered by the District Court. Plaintiff is are advised that this
Recommendation is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is not appealable.
Failure to file a written objection to the proposed findings and recommendations in
the Magistrate Judge's report shall bar the party from a de novo determination by the District
Court of issues covered in the report and shall bar the party from attacking on appeal factual
findings in the report accepted or adopted by the District Court except upon grounds of plain
error or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5 th Cir. 1982). See Stein
v. Reynolds Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11th Cir. 1982). See also Bonner v. City of
Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc), adopting as binding precedent all of the
decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to the close of business on
September 30, 1981 .
Done, this 19 th day of June 2013.
/s/Terry F. Moorer
TERRY F. MOORER
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 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?