Davis v. Montgomery et al

Filing 9

ORDER adopting 5 Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects; dismissing this case without predudice for failing to state a claim for which relief may be granted; finding that dismissal of this action constitutes as a strike and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Chief Judge J. Leon Holmes on 7/15/11. (pag)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PINE BLUFF DIVISION
WILLIE GASTER DAVIS, JR.,
ADC #109028
v.

PLAINTIFF

No. 5:11CV00150 JLH/JTR

BARBARA A. MONTGOMERY,
Sergeant, Maximum Security Unit, et al.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted by
United States Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray and the filed objections. 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 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 the screening function mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, this case is

DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE, for failing to state a claim on which relief may be granted.
2.

Dismissal of this action CONSTITUTES a “strike,” as defined by 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(g).
3.

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.
DATED this 15th day of July, 2011.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE