Hampton v. Arkansas Department of Correction et al

Filing 8

ORDER: The Court construes Hampton's 6 Motion for more time as an objection to the proposed recommendation. On de novo review, the Court adopts the 5 recommendation as modified. Her claims against the remaining Defendants are therefore dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 4/4/2017. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
NORTHERN DIVISION
STORMY LYNN HAMPTON,
ADC# 711838

v.

PLAINTIFF

No. 1:16-cv-171-DPM

ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTION, et al.
ORDER

DEFENDANTS

1. The Court construes Hampton's motion for more time, NQ 6, as an

objection to the proposed recommendation. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). Hampton
hasn't filed any more objections since the Court granted the requested
extension; and the time to do so has passed. NQ 7.
2. On de nova review, the Court adopts the recommendation as

modified. NQ 5. Construing the complaint liberally, Hampton has stated a
deliberate indifference claim against Deputy Warden Faust. NQ 2 at 5. But
without more particulars about who did what and when, Hampton hasn't
stated any other claims that can proceed past screening. Her claims against
the remaining Defendants are therefore dismissed without prejudice.

So Ordered.

D.P. Marshall Jr.£1
United States District Judge

-2-