Cincoski v. Burl et al

Filing 24

ORDER adopting 17 Judge Volpe's Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition as its own except the dismissal should be without prejudice; denying as moot 14 and 15 Cincoski's Motions for Appointed Counsel and 21 Motion for Prelimin ary Injunction; dismissing without prejudice 13 Cincoski's Amended Complaint; and, certifying that an informa pauperis appeal from this Order and the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 6/13/2011. (dmn)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

EASTERN DIVISION

DANIEL CINCOSKI,

ADC # 143538

v.

PLAINTIFF

Case No. 2:10-cv-188-DPM

BURL, BALL, PETER EDWARDS,
JOHN LAD, C. WRIGHT and
RAY HOBBS
DEFENDANTS

ORDER
The Court has considered Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe's Proposed
Finding and Recommendations, Document No. 17, and Daniel Cincoski's
objections, Document Nos. 19 & 20. After de novo review, the court adopts
Judge Volpe's recommended disposition as its own except the dismissal
should be without prejudice.

FED.

R. ClV. P. 72(b)(3). Cincoski's claims are

either too general, or where specific too fanciful, to be plausible. Cincoski's
motions for appointed counsel, Document Nos. 14 & 15, and for a preliminary
injunction, Document No. 21, are denied as moot.

Cincoski's amended complaint, Document No. 13, is dismissed without
prejudice as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. This dismissal counts as
a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court certifies that an in forma

pauperis appeal from this Order and the accompanying Judgment would not
be taken in goof faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
So Ordered.

D.P. Marshall Jr.
United States District Judge

j

2

3

gvtJe ;"{)!'