Coggins v. Town of Jackson's Gap (MAG+)

Filing 19

ORDER that the Mr. Coggins' objections to the Order (doc. 14 ) denying his motion doc. 12 and to the Recommendation doc. 17 are overruled, the Recommendation of the Mag Judge is adopted and this case is due to be dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Honorable William Keith Watkins on 3/17/09. (Attachments: # 1 civil appeals checklist)(vma, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION G E N E COGGINS, P l a in tif f , v. TOWN OF JACKSON'S GAP, D e f e n d a n t. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

C A S E NO. 3:09-CV-65-WKW

ORDER O n March 9, 2009, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc. # 17) that this a c tio n be dismissed for Plaintiff Gene Coggins' (Mr. Coggins) failure to pay a filing fee. On M a rc h 16, 2009, Mr. Coggins filed a Motion to Dismiss Order and Recommendations (Doc. # 18), which the court construes as containing both an objection to the Order (Doc. # 17) d e n yin g Plaintiff's Motion to Clarify IFP Hearing Date (Doc. # 15) and the Recommendation (D o c . # 17) that this case be dismissed. The court construes Mr. Coggins' objection to the O rd e r (Doc. # 17) as a renewed objection to the underlying Order (Doc. # 14) denying his M o tio n for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. # 2). 1 H a v in g conducted an independent and de novo review of the Order (Doc. # 17) d e n yin g Mr. Coggins' Motion to Clarify, and those portions of the Recommendation to w h ic h objection is made, see 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the court finds that Mr. Coggins'

Out of an abundance of caution, this court construes Mr. Coggins' Motion to Clarify (Doc. # 15) as the original objection to the Magistrate Judge's Order (Doc. # 14).

1

objections are without merit; Mr. Coggins had notice (Doc. # 6) that failure to appear at the in forma pauperis hearing may result in denial of his Motion to proceed in forma pauperis (D o c . # 12) and his Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 18) raises no issues which were unaddressed b y the Recommendation. F o r these reasons, it is ORDERED that the Mr. Coggins' objections to the Order (Doc. # 14) denying his Motion (Doc. # 12) and to the Recommendation (Doc. # 17) are O V E R R U L E D , the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED and this case is due to be DISMISSED with prejudice. A n appropriate judgment will be entered. D O N E this 17th day of March, 2009. /s/ W. Keith Watkins UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE