Pepper v. Clinkscale et al

Filing 35

ORDER ADOPTING 32 PARTIAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS in their entirety; therefore, the John Doe Defendants and Pltf's inadequate medical care claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; John Doe terminated; the Court certifies that an ifp appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 4/19/10. (vjt)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS EASTERN DIVISION GREG PEPPER ADC #079459 V. 2:09CV00143 SWW/JTR DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Partial Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray and the filed objections.1 After carefully considering these documents and making a de novo review of the record in this case, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommended Partial 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. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m), the John Doe Defendants and Plaintiff's inadequate PLAINTIFF ANDREW CLINKSCALE, Corporal, East Arkansas Regional Unit, et al. medical care claims are DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, due to a lack of service. 2. The Court CERTIFIES, 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. Dated this 19th day of April, 2010. /s/Susan Webber Wright UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE In his objections, Plaintiff states that he mailed a motion for service identifying John Doe Defendants to the Arkansas Attorney General's Office. However, to this date, he has failed to file a Motion for Service with the Court containing the full names and service addresses for the John Doe Defendants as ordered by the Court on December 11, 2009. 1

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?