Nichols v. Pepper et al

Filing 39

ORDER ADOPTING 33 the recommended disposition; ordering that Nichols be allowed to proceed with the inadequate medical care claims raised in 25 his first amended complaint against defendants Shock and Johnson, and service be ordered on both of th ose defendants; dismissing, without prejudice, the inadequate medical care claims raised in the first amended complaint against defendants Griffin, Hughey, and Green-McDowell, for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted; dismissing, without prejudice, 29 Nichols's second amended complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may granted; denying 24 30 Nichols's motions to amend the complaint; denying 14 Nichols's motion for preliminary injunction; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Chief Judge Brian S. Miller on 8/18/2015. (kdr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WESTERN DIVISION

BILLY MACK NICHOLS, JR.
ADC #092713
V.

PLAINTIFF

CASE NO. 5:14CV00448 BSM-JTR

SONYA PEPPERS–DAVIS, Doctor,
Tucker Maximum Security Unit, et al.

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
The recommended disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge J. Thomas
Ray has been received.

No objections have been filed. After careful review, the

recommended disposition is approved and adopted in its entirety.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.

Nichols be allowed to proceed with the inadequate medical care claims raised

in his first amended complaint [Doc. No. 25] against defendants Shock and Johnson,
and service should be ordered on both of those defendants.
2.

The inadequate medical care claims raised in the first amended complaint

against defendants Griffin, Hughey, and Green–McDowell be dismissed without
prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
3.

Nichols’s second amended complaint [Doc. No. 29] be dismissed without

prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
4.

Nichols’s motions to amend the complaint [Doc. Nos. 24 & 30] be denied.

5.

Nichols’s motion for preliminary injunction [Doc. No. 14] be denied.

6.

It is certified that an in forma pauperis appeal from this order would not be

taken in good faith pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
IT IS SO ORDERED this 18th day of August 2015.

_______________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE