Chavis v. Jones et al

Filing 18

JUDGMENT: Consistent with the 17 Order entered on this date, it is considered, ordered, and adjudged that plaintiff's complaint against defendants Franks, Lindsey Paxton, Dan Roberts, Earl Phillips, and the Arkansas Department of Correctio n is dismissed with prejudice, and defendant Jones is dismissed without prejudice. This dismissal is considered a "strike" within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA"), 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court c ertifies that an in forma pauperis appeal from the Order and Judgment dismissing this action will not be taken in good faith U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 06/05/2015. (rhm)(Docket text modified on 6/5/2015 to correct the description of the document filed). (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WESTERN DIVISION
JOHN CHAVIS,
ADC #141259
v.

PLAINTIFF

Case No. 4:15-cv-00139-KGB-JTK

JONES, et al.

DEFENDANTS
JUDGMENT

Consistent with the Order entered on this date, it is considered, ordered, and adjudged that
plaintiff’s complaint against defendants Franks, Lindsey Paxton, Dan Roberts, Earl Phillips, and the
Arkansas Department of Correction is dismissed with prejudice, and defendant Jones is dismissed
without prejudice. This dismissal is considered a “strike” within the meaning of the Prison
Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”), 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis
appeal from the Order and Judgment dismissing this action will not be taken in good faith. 28
U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
SO ADJUDGED this the 5th day of June, 2015.

________________________________
KRISTINE G. BAKER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE