Carey v. Hubbard, et al. (INMATE 2)

Filing 6

ORDER directing that, based upon an independent and de novo review of those portions of the Recommendation to which objection is made, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), it is ORDERED as follows: (1) Plaintiff's objections (Doc. # 5 ) are OVERRULED; (2) the Recommendation (Doc. # 4 ) is ADOPTED; and (3) Plaintiff's action is DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of process under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i-iii). Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 12/01/14. (scn, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
CARLOS CAREY, #245 045,
Plaintiff,
v.
KATHRYN D. HUBBARD,
ANNE ADAMS HILL, CAPTAIN
LOGAN, WARDEN PHYLISS
BILLUPS,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 2:14-CV-1054-WKW
[WO]

ORDER
Before the court are the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 4)
and Plaintiff’s objections (Doc. # 5). Based upon an independent and de novo
review of those portions of the Recommendation to which objection is made, see
28 U.S.C. § 636(b), it is ORDERED as follows:
1.

Plaintiff’s objections (Doc. # 5) are OVERRULED;

2.

the Recommendation (Doc. # 4) is ADOPTED; and

3.

Plaintiff’s action is DISMISSED with prejudice prior to service of

process under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i-iii).
A final judgment will be entered separately.
DONE this 1st day of December, 2014.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE