Carey v. Mason et al (INMATE 2)

Filing 86

ORDER as follows: (1) the 83 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED; (2) plf's 1 request for equitable relief is DISMISSED as moot; (3) the 23 & 66 Motions to Dismiss by defs Siddiq and Moore is GRANTED and the c ase is DISMISSED with prejudice against these defendants under 42 USC 1997e(a) for plf's failure to exhaust administrative remedies; (4) the 34 & 65 Motions for Summary Judgment by defs Thomas, Randolph, King, Mason, Jenkins, and Jackson ar e GRANTED; (5) def Whitley's 34 motion for summary judgment regarding the claim for monetary damages lodged against him in his official capacity is GRANTED; and (6) def Whitley's 34 motion for summary judgment regarding plf's eighth amendment excessive-force claim lodged against him in his individual capacity is DENIED. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 9/30/16. (Attachments: # 1 civil appeals checklist)(djy, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
CARLOS CAREY, #245045,
Plaintiff,
v.
RENE MASON, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 2:13-CV-705-WKW
[WO]

ORDER
Before the court is the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. (Doc. # 83.)
There being no timely objection filed to the Recommendation, and based on a review
of the record, it is ORDERED as follows:
1.

The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 83) is

ADOPTED;
2.

Plaintiff’s request for equitable relief (Doc. # 1) is DISMISSED as

3.

The motions to dismiss filed by Defendants Siddiq and Moore (Docs.

moot;

# 23, 66) is GRANTED and the case is DISMISSED with prejudice against these
defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) for Plaintiff’s failure to exhaust his
administrative remedies;

4.

The motions for summary judgment filed by Defendants Thomas,

Randolph, King, Mason, Jenkins, and Jackson (Docs. # 34, 65) are GRANTED;
5.

Defendant Whitley’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. # 34)

regarding the claim for monetary damages lodged against him in his official capacity
is GRANTED; and
6.

Defendant Whitley’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. # 34)

regarding Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment excessive-force claim lodged against him
in his individual capacity is DENIED.
DONE this 30th day of September, 2016.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2