Doering v. Moore et al

Filing 47

ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING 45 46 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDED PARTIAL DISPOSITIONS; granting without prejudice 33 Defendant Wendy Kelley's motion for summary judgment; granting without prejudice 30 Defendant Annette Esaw's m otion for summary judgment; dismissing Defendant Troy Moore without prejudice due to lack of service; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 10/14/2014. (rhm)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION ALAN L. DOERING ADC #106115 v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 5:13-cv-00149 KGB/JTR DR. MOORE, Cummins Unit, Arkansas Department of Correction, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Partial Dispositions submitted by United States Magistrate Judge J. Thomas Ray (Dkt. Nos. 45, 46). No objections have been filed, and the time for filing objections has passed. After careful review, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommended Partial Dispositions 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. 30). Defendant Wendy Kelley’s motion for summary judgment is granted (Dkt. No. Defendant Annette Esaw’s motion for summary judgment is granted (Dkt. No. 33). Plaintiff Alan L. Doering’s claims against Ms. Kelley and Ms. Esaw are dismissed without prejudice due to lack of exhaustion. 2. Defendant Troy Moore is dismissed without prejudice from this action due to lack of service. 3. 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. SO ORDERED this the 14th day of October, 2014. ______________________________ Kristine G. Baker United States District Judge   2

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?