Avery v. Cashion et al

Filing 33

ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING 17 PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS as this Court's findings in all respects. Defendant Ronald Ganna should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 12/04/2014. (rhm)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION ROBERT WILLIAM AVERY, ADC #652373 v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 5:13-cv-00378-KGB-HDY MARK CASHION, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has received the Proposed Findings and Recommendations filed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe (Dkt. No. 17). After careful review of the Proposed Findings and Recommendations, plaintiff Robert William Avery’s timely objection (Dkt. No. 18), as well as a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommendations should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted as this Court’s findings in all respects. Defendant Ronald Ganna should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted. Mr. Avery’s objection states that Mr. Ganna has “knowledge of the issues of this case by Avery’s use of the grievance system” and that Mr. Ganna “made various responses to Avery’s grievances that are [the] subject matter of this case.” Mr. Avery also notes that his prior claims against Mr. Ganna in his individual capacity survived summary judgment before this Court dismissed them without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee, failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), and failure to respond to the Court’s order. Even so, Mr. Avery does not make any claims, allegations, or references to Mr. Ganna in this complaint. Mr. Avery may amend his complaint to do so if he wishes. IT IS SO ORDERED this the 4th day of December, 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?