Faruq v. Garrett et al

Filing 5

ORDER ADOPTING 3 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS. Signed by Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren on July 19, 2010. (src)

Faruq v. Garrett et al

Doc. 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT W E S T ER N DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS F AY E TT E VI L LE DIVISION KHALIFAH FARUQ v. C HI EF OF POLICE JOE G AR RE T T , Siloam Springs P ol ic e Department; and SHERIFF ARNOTT, Greene C ou nt y , Missouri ORDER N O W on this 19t h day of July 2010, comes on for consideration t he Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (document #3), filed on March 17, 2010, and plaintiff's objections thereto Ci v i l No. 10-5052 PLAINTIFF

DEFENDANTS

( do cu m e n t #4), filed on March 26, 2010.

The Court, being well and with respect

s uf fi c i e n t l y advised, finds and orders as follows thereto: 1.

Plaintiff's objections offer neither law nor fact requiring

d ep ar t u r e from the Report and Recommendation and the same should and w il l be overruled. 2. The Report and Recommendation is sound in all respects and

s ho ul d be adopted in toto. 3. Th e plaintiff is advised that he may reopen the case on

p ay me n t of the $350 filing fee and the filing of a motion to reopen. See Witzke v. Hiller, 966 F.Supp. 538, 540 (E.D. Mich. IFP status under to section 1915(g) to and dismissing it upon

1997)(revoking action without

prejudice

inmate's

right

re-file

p ay me n t of filing fee). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED

Dockets.Justia.com

*

that plaintiff's objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report

A nd Recommendation should be, and they hereby are, overruled; * that the said Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation

s ho ul d be, and it hereby is, adopted in toto. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, plaintiff's IFP application should b e, and hereby is, denied pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and this c as e is dismissed. IT IS SO ORDERED. /s/ Jimm Larry Hendren JIMM LARRY HENDREN U N I T E D STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-