CADEJUSTE v. LOCKE ET AL

Filing 13

ORDER adopting Magistrate Judge's 11 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice as malicious pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), for Plaintiff's abuse of the judicial process. Pla intiff's second motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 8 ) and motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 9 ), as well as all other pending motions, are DENIED as moot. Clerk shall close the file. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE M CASEY RODGERS on 12/22/2016. (MB)

Download PDF
Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION GIEUVOIS CADEJUSTE, Plaintiff, v. CASE NO. 3:16cv465/MCR/CJK MAILROOM SUPERVISOR LOCKE, et al., Defendants. __________________________________/ ORDER This cause comes on for consideration of the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation dated December 12, 2016. ECF No. 11. 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). After reviewing any timely objections to the Recommendation, the Court has determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows: 1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 11, is adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order. Page 2 of 2 2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice as malicious pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i), for Plaintiff's abuse of the judicial process. 3. Plaintiff's second motion to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 8) and motion for reconsideration (ECF No. 9), as well as all other pending motions, are DENIED as moot. 4. The clerk shall close the file. DONE AND ORDERED this 22nd day of December, 2016. M. Casey Rodgers M. CASEY RODGERS CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Case No. 3:16cv465/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?