Coker v. Corizon Medical Services, Inc. et al

Filing 9

ORDER ADOPTING & ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS; all claims except pla's 8th amendment medical care and state law negligence claims against dft BArrett, Hood, Sayhu, Stubbs, Hunt, Hooper, Feelyon and an unknown dentist and dental technician are dismissed; pla's 8th amendment claims are referred to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. Signed by Judge Sharon Lovelace Blackburn on 12/17/2013. (KAM, )

FILED
2013 Dec-17 PM 04:09
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHEASTERN DIVISION

LARRY G. COKER,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
) Case No. 5:12-cv-01028-SLB-TMP
)
CORIZON MEDICAL SERVICES, )
et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)

ORDER
The magistrate judge filed a report and recommendation on October 7, 2013,
recommending that the following claims be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
1915A(b)(1) for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted: (1)
plaintiff’s 42 U.S.C. § 1985 conspiracy claims against all defendants; (2) plaintiff’s
Eighth Amendment medical care and habeas claims against Defendant Allen; (3)
plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment medical care claims against Defendant Corizon, Inc.;
and (4) plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment medical care claims against Defendant
Ambrosity. (Doc. 8.) The magistrate judge further recommended that plaintiff's
Eighth Amendment medical care and state law negligence claims against Defendants
Barrett, Hood, Sayhu, Stubbs, Hunt, Hooper, Feelyon, and an unknown dentist and

dental technician be referred to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. Plaintiff
has not filed any objections.
Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court
file, including the report and recommendation, the Court is of the opinion that the
magistrate judge's report is due to be and is hereby ADOPTED and the magistrate
judge's recommendation is ACCEPTED. It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED,
and DECREED that all of plaintiff's claims in this action except his Eighth
Amendment medical care and state law negligence claims against Defendants Barrett,
Hood, Sayhu, Stubbs, Hunt, Hooper, Feelyon, and an unknown dentist and dental
technician are DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). It is further
ORDERED that plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment medical care and state law negligence
claims against Defendants Barrett, Hood, Sayhu, Stubbs, Hunt, Hooper, Feelyon, and
an unknown dentist and dental technician are REFERRED to the magistrate judge
for further proceedings.
DONE this 17th day of December, 2013.

SHARON LOVELACE BLACKBURN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2