Carter v. Department of Corrections et al (INMATE2)

Filing 9

ORDERED as follows: (1) The 6 Recommendation is ADOPTED; (2)Plaintiff's complaint against the Department of Corrections is DISMISSED, with prejudice prior to service of process; (2) The Alabama Department of Corrections is DISMISSED as a defendant in this cause of action; and (3) This case, with respect to the allegations set forth against the remaining defendants, be referred back to the Magistrate Judge for appropriate proceedings. Signed by Honorable Ira De Ment on 8/20/2009. (cb, )

Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION SEAN M. CARTER, Plaintiff, v. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER On July 20, 2009, the Magistrate Judge entered a Recommendation 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 ORDERED that the RECOMMENDATION is hereby ADOPTED. It is further ORDERED as follows: 1. Plaintiff's complaint against the Department of Corrections is DISMISSED, with prejudice prior to service of process, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii); 2. The Alabama Department of Corrections is DISMISSED as a defendant in this cause of action; and CASE NO. 3:09-cv-606-ID [WO] DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., Defendants. 3. This case, with respect to the allegations set forth against the remaining defendants, be referred back to the Magistrate Judge for appropriate proceedings. D o n e this 20 th day of August, 2009. /s/ Ira DeMent SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?