WARD v. SMITH, et al
ORDER adopting the magistrate judge's 13 Report and Recommendation. This case is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The dismissal of this case operates as a "strike" pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The clerk is directed to close the file. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE M CASEY RODGERS on 7/28/2017. (djb)
Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PANAMA CITY DIVISION
CASE NO. 5:17cv12-MCR-GRJ
SMITH, et al.,
This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and
Recommendation dated June 23, 2017. ECF No. 13. The parties 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
Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:
The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and
incorporated by reference in this Order.
Page 2 of 2
This case is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) for
failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The dismissal of this case
operates as a “strike” pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
The clerk is directed to close the file.
DONE AND ORDERED this 28th day of July, 2017.
M. Casey Rodgers
M. CASEY RODGERS
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case No. 5:17cv12-MCR-GRJ
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?