JOHNSON v. MCNEIL

Filing 35

ORDER adopting 31 Report and Recommendation ; granting 27 Motion to Dismiss Case as Frivolous. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE M CASEY RODGERS on 2/17/2012. Plaintiffs amended complaint (doc. 7 ) is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997(e) and for abuse of the judicial process. The dismissal of this case shall count as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). (kdm)

Download PDF
Page 1 of 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION ANDREW ROMEO JOHNSON, Plaintiff, v. CASE NO. 4:10cv513-MP-WCS WARDEN PIPPEN, Defendant. _____________________________/ ORDER This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation dated October 21, 2011. (Doc. 31). 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 any timely filed objections. Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections thereto timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation 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. Defendant's motion to dismiss (doc. 27) is GRANTED. 3. Plaintiff’s amended complaint (doc. 7) is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997(e) and for abuse of the judicial process. The dismissal of this case shall count as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). DONE and ORDERED this 17th day of February, 2012. s/ M. Casey Rodgers M. CASEY RODGERS CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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?