Rothrock v. Thomas et al (INMATE 1)

Filing 5

ORDER: It is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court that: 1. The 4 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED. 2. That this case is DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process pursuant to the directives of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) as the plaintiff failed to file the complaintwithin the time prescribed by the applicable period of limitation. Signed by Honorable Judge Mark E. Fuller on 6/25/2014. (dmn, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION HENRY ROTHROCK, #248131, Plaintiff, v. KIM TOBIAS THOMAS, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 2:14-cv-366-MEF WO ORDER On May 29, 2014, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc. #4) in this case to which no timely objections have been filed. Upon an independent review of the file in this case and upon consideration of the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT and DECREE of the court that: 1. The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED. 2. That this case is DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process pursuant to the directives of 28 U.S.C. ยง 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) as the plaintiff failed to file the complaint within the time prescribed by the applicable period of limitation.1 DONE this the 25th day of June, 2014. /s/ Mark E. Fuller UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 1 The plaintiff is advised that if he seeks to challenge actions taken against him by correctional officials at Limestone during the past two years, he may do so by filing a separate civil action against these officials in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama.

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?