Brooks v. McDonald et al (JOINT ASSIGN)(MAG+)

Filing 55

ORDERED as follows: 1) Plf's 54 objection is OVERRULED; 2) The 53 Recommendation is ADOPTED; 3) Dfts' 29 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED; 4) Plf's claims against The Montgomery Advertiser and Kala Kachmar are DISMISSED for failure t o state a claim upon which relief can be granted; 5) The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate The Montgomery Advertiser and Kala Kachmar as Dfts in this action; 6) This action is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 2/26/2016. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist) (wcl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
EASTERN DIVISION
DANNY L. BROOKS,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
ROBERT McDONALD, et al.,
Defendants.

CASE NO. 3:15-CV-383-WKW
[WO]

ORDER
On February 11, 2016, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc.
# 53) to which Plaintiff filed an objection (Doc. # 54). The court has conducted an
independent and de novo review of those portions of the Recommendation to
which objection is made. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The Complaint contains no
allegations that demonstrate a plausible claim against Defendants The Montgomery
Advertiser

and

Kala

Kachmar

(collectively

“Defendants”).

The

Recommendation’s analysis is sound, and Plaintiff’s objection lacks merit.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:
1.

Plaintiff’s objection (Doc. # 54) is OVERRULED.

2.

The Recommendation (Doc. # 53) is ADOPTED.

3.

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 29) is GRANTED.

4.

Plaintiff’s claims against The Montgomery Advertiser and Kala

Kachmar are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be
granted.
5.

The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate The Montgomery

Advertiser and Kala Kachmar as Defendants in this action.
6.

This action is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further

proceedings.
DONE this 26th day of February, 2016.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2