Coggins v. Department of Human Resources, et al (MAG+)

Filing 9

ORDER directing that, upon an independent review of the file in this case and upon consideration of the 7 Recommendation, it is ORDERED that the 7 Recommendation is ADOPTED, Plaintiff's claims are DISMISSED without prejudice, and Plaintiff&# 039;s 6 Motion for Default and Default Judgment is DENIED; further, Plaintiff's 8 objection is OVERRULED because this court did not violate Plaintiff's constitutional rights by referring his case to a magistrate judge as authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). Signed by Honorable William Keith Watkins on 5/11/11. (scn, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
EASTERN DIVISION
GENE COGGINS,
Plaintiff,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN
RESOURCES, et al.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 2:11-CV-0231-WKW [WO]

ORDER
On April 26, 2011, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case to which
no timely objections have been filed. (Doc. # 7.) Upon an independent review of the file in
this case and upon consideration of the Recommendation, it is ORDERED that the
Recommendation is ADOPTED, Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED without prejudice, and
Plaintiff’s “Motion for Default and Default Judgment” is DENIED (Doc. # 6).
Further, during the pendency of the referral of this case, Plaintiff filed a “Reply to the
Illegal Order, Document #3 Dated 03/31/2011” (Doc. # 8), objecting to this court’s referral
of his case to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (Doc. # 3). Plaintiff’s
objection is OVERRULED because this court did not violate Plaintiff’s constitutional rights
by referring his case to a magistrate judge as authorized by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). See United
States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 680-81 (1980) (finding that the Federal Magistrates Act
does not violate due process).

DONE this 11th day of May, 2011.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2