Carstarphen v. Carr Allison Law Firm et al
ORDER ADOPTING 22 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. Dfts' 7 MOTION to Dismiss, 14 MOTION to Dismiss are MOOT, & this action is DISMISSED without prejudice as set out. Signed by Senior Judge Callie V. S. Granade on 10/18/2016. (copy mailed to Plf on 10/19/16) (tot)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
ANDRE CARSTARPHEN, SR.,
CARR ALLISON LAW FIRM, et al.,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 16-0368-CG-N
After due and proper consideration of the issues raised, and there having
been no objections file,1 the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 22) of the Magistrate
Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B)-(C), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
72(b), and S.D. Ala. GenLR 72(a)(2)(S), and dated September 16, 2016, is
ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Defendants’ motions to dismiss (Docs.
7, 14) are MOOT and that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice under
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3) for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. In
accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58, final judgment shall be entered
by separate document.
DONE and ORDERED this 18th day of October, 2016.
/s/ Callie V. S. Granade
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
The Court NOTES the Plaintiff’s Motion to End (Dismiss) & Restore (Doc. 24), Defendant,
Circuit Court Judge James C. Wood’s response thereto (Doc. 26), and the Plaintiff’s second motion to
dismiss (Doc. 27).
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?