Edwards v. Jones et al (INMATE2)

Filing 17

ORDERED that (1) the plaintiff's 7 objection to the Recommendation is overruled; (2) the 6 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is adopted; (3) plaintiff's claims against defendants J. Jones, C. Torbert, C. Welch, and T. Jones are dis missed without prejudice and prior to service of process; (4) defendants J. Jones, C. Torbert, C. Welch, and T. Jones are dismissed as parties to the complaint pursuant to 28 USC 1919(e)(2)(B); and (5) this case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. Signed by Honorable Ira De Ment on 9/4/09. (sl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA OF E A S T E R N DIVISION D E M E T R IU S M. EDWARDS, P la in tiff, v. S H E R IF F JAY JONES, et al., D e fe n d a n ts . ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

C A S E NO. 3:09-CV-660-ID (W O )

ORDER
A fte r an independent review of the file, it is hereby CONSIDERED and ORDERED th a t: 1 . The plaintiff's objection (Doc. # 7) to the Recommendation of the Magistrate J u d g e , filed on August 11, 2009, is OVERRULED; 2 . The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #6), filed on July 28, 2009, is ADOPTED; 3 . Plaintiff's claims against defendants J. Jones, C. Torbert. C. Welch, and T. Jones a re DISMISSED without prejudice and prior to service of process;1 4 . Defendants J. Jones, C. Torbert. C. Welch, and T. Jones are DISMISSED as parties to the Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1919(e)(2)(B); and 5. This case is REFERRED back to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. DONE this 4th day of September, 2009. /s/ Ira DeMent SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

A dismissal "without prejudice" is a "dismissal that does not bar the plaintiff from refiling the lawsuit within the applicable limitations period." Black's Law Dictionary (8th ed. 2004)
1