Antonelli v. Luekefeld et al

Filing 167

ORDER ADOPTING 157 Partial Report and Recommendations dismissing with prejudice plaintiff's claim that defts Martha DePoorter and Brian Phillips retaliated against him; and denying 158 Motion to Clarify. Signed by Judge Brian S. Miller on 8/18/10. (bkp)

Download PDF
Antonelli v. Leukefeld et al Doc. 167 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS EASTERN DIVISION MICHAEL ANTONELLI REG. #04053-164 V. 2:07CV00118 BSM JTR D EFENDANTS PLAINTIFF ALISON LUEKEFELD, RDAP Coordinator, FCI, Forrest City, AR, et al. ORDE R The partial recommend disposition submitted by Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray has been received. Plaintiff's motion to clarify the partial recommended disposition (Doc. No. 158) is construed as objections. After carefully reviewing the partial recommended disposition, objections, and reviewing the record de novo, it is concluded that the partial recommended disposition should be, and hereby is, adopted in all respects in its entirety. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff's claim that defendants Martha DePoorter and Brian Phillips retaliated against him by issuing a false disciplinary charge on June 16, 2005, is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 2. Further, it is certified, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. 3. Plaintiff's motion to clarify the partial recommended disposition (Doc. No. 158), which is construed as objections, is DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 18th day of August, 2010. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dockets.Justia.com

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?