WILDER v. ARA MARK et al

Filing 25

ORDER adopting the chief magistrate judge's 21 Report and Recommendation. Defendant Burgess' 12 Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED, Plaintiff's claims against Defendant Burgess are DISMISSED with prejudice. Pla intiff's Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim and his Fourth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Aramark and Hannah are DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Plaintiff's Fourte enth Amendment due process claim against Defendant Aramark is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), without prejudice to Plaintiffs filing an amended complaint. Plaintiff's 5 Emergency Temporary Injunction is DENI ED. This case is hereby remanded to the assigned magistrate judge for further proceedings against Defendants Aramark and Mr. Hannah based upon their alleged failure to provide medically prescribed meals. Signed by SENIOR JUDGE ROGER VINSON on 9/19/2017. ALLISON BURGESS (ARPN) terminated. (djb)

Download PDF
Page 1 of 3 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION RICKIE E. WILDER, Plaintiff, vs. Case No.: 3:17cv239/RV/EMT ARAMARK, et al., Defendants. ____________________________/ ORDER This cause comes on for consideration upon the chief magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation dated August 9, 2017 (ECF No. 21). The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of the timely filed objections. Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the timely filed objections thereto (doc. 24), I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows: 1. The chief magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by reference in this order. 2. Defendant Burgess’ motion to dismiss (ECF No. 12) is GRANTED, Page 2 of 3 Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Burgess are DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), and Defendant Burgess is terminated from this case; 3. Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment equal protection claim and his Fourth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendment claims against Defendants Aramark and Hannah are DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); 4. Plaintiff’s Fourteenth Amendment due process claim against Defendant Aramark is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii), without prejudice to Plaintiff’s filing an amended complaint; 5. Plaintiff’s “Emergency Temporary Injunction” (ECF No. 5) is DENIED; 6. This case is hereby remanded to the assigned magistrate judge for further and proceedings, including issuance of an order establishing a deadline for Plaintiff to file an amended complaint asserting Fourteenth Amendment due process claims against Defendants Aramark and Mr. Hannah based upon their alleged failure to provide medically prescribed meals. Case No.: 3:17cv239/RV/EMT Page 3 of 3 DONE AND ORDERED this 19th day of September, 2017. /s/ Roger Vinson ROGER VINSON SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Case No.: 3:17cv239/RV/EMT

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?