Hardy v. Budnik et al
Filing
5
ORDER adopting 4 Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects. Plaintiff's complaint against defendants is DISMISSED, for failure to state a claim. This dismissal constitutes a s trike within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 6/4/2014. (ks)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
NORTHERN DIVISION
LAMARCUS HARDY,
ADC #148123
v.
PLAINTIFF
No. 1:14CV00040-JLH-JJV
STEPHANIE BUDNIK, Counselor,
ADC Grimes Unit; et al.
DEFENDANTS
ORDER
The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted
by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe. No objections have been filed. After careful
consideration, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition
should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court’s findings in all
respects.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that:
1.
Plaintiff’s complaint against defendants is DISMISSED, for failure to state a claim.
2.
This dismissal constitutes a “strike” within the meaning of the Prison Litigation
Reform Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
3.
The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis
appeal from this Order and the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 4th day of June, 2014.
__________________________________
J. LEON HOLMES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?