DAVIS v. BELL et al

Filing 11

ORDER adopting the magistrate judge's 7 Report and Recommendation. This action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and (iii) and the clerk is directed to close the file. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE M CASEY RODGERS on 8/23/2011. (djb)

Download PDF
Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION CHRISTIAN RALPH DAVIS, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 3:10cv498/MCR/CJK FRANK BELL, et al., Defendants. _________________________/ ORDER This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation dated June 24, 2011(doc. 7). Plaintiff has been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1).1 No objections have been filed. Having fully considered the record and the Report and Recommendation, the court finds that it should be adopted. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows: 1. The magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order. 2. This action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1 The m ail was returned as undeliverable on July 25, 2011. The Clerk m ailed it again to the Escam bia County Jail and 608 N. C Street, Pensacola, Florida, and the plaintiff was provided an additional 14 days to file objections. The 608 N. C Street copy was returned as undeliverable but the second copy m ailed to the Escam bia County Jail was not returned. Thus, the court assum es that the plaintiff received the Report and Recom m endation. Page 2 of 2 § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and (iii) and the clerk is directed to close the file. DONE AND ORDERED this 23rd day of August, 2011. M. Casey Rodgers M. CASEY RODGERS CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Case No: 3:10cv498/MCR/CJK

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?