Frazier v. Woods et al

Filing 14

ORDER approving and adopting 11 Recommended Disposition its entirety as this Court's findings and conclusions in all respects; dismissing, without prejudice, this action; recommending that dismissal of this case count as a "strike" in the future; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Lee P. Rudofsky on 1/28/2025. (ldb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
CENTRAL DIVISION
CARLOS RAY FRAZIER
ADC #650936
v.

PLAINTIFF
No. 4:24-cv-00766-LPR

LAFAYETTE WOODS, JR., et al.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

The Court has reviewed the Recommended Disposition (RD) submitted by United States
Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney (Doc. 11). No objections have been filed, and the time for
doing so has expired. After a de novo review of the RD, along with careful consideration of the
entire case record, the Court hereby approves and adopts the RD in its entirety as this Court’s
findings and conclusions in all respects.1
Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted. The Court recommends that dismissal of this case count as a “strike,”
in the future, for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order and the accompanying Judgment
would not be taken in good faith.2
IT IS SO ORDERED this 28th day of January 2025.
_______________________________
LEE P. RUDOFSKY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1
There is one exception. The Court declines to adopt Footnote 1 of the RD. It appears this footnote does not actually
apply to the instant case.
2

The information set out in Footnote 2 of the RD provides—on its own—sufficient grounds to dismiss this case
without prejudice. It is unclear to me why the RD goes any further. But, at the end of the day, the RD’s additional
analysis is not wrong.