Bingham v. Thomas et al

Filing 73

ORDER denying 51 Motion for Default Judgment; granting 55 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; adopting Report and Recommendations re 71 Report and Recommendations. Plaintiff's Complaint and Amended Complaint are dismissed as to Defendant's Allen, Isom, Railey, Rigsby, Scales, and Thomas. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 4/18/2012. (bcl)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ALBANY DIVISION
RANDALL BINGHAM,

:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
v.
:
:
DARLENE THOMAS, et al.,
:
:
Defendants.
:
____________________________________:

Case No. 1:08-cv-152 (WLS)

ORDER
Before the Court is a Report and Recommendation from United States Magistrate Judge
Thomas Q. Langstaff, filed March 27, 2012. (Doc. 71). It is recommended that Petitioner’s 42
U.S.C. § 1983 action be dismissed pursuant to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss for failure to
exhaust administrative remedies. (Id. at 5-6). Also recommended is the denial of Plaintiff’s
Motion for Default Judgment. (Id. at 6).
The Report and Recommendation provided the Parties with fourteen (14) days1 from the
date of its service to file written objections to the recommendations therein. (Id.). The period for
filing objections expired on Friday, April 13, 2012; no objections have been filed to date. (See
Docket).
Upon full review and consideration of the record, and in view of the absence of an
objection on the record, the Court finds that U.S. Magistrate Judge Thomas Q. Langstaff’s March
27, 2012 Report and Recommendation (Doc. 71) should be, and hereby is, ACCEPTED,
ADOPTED and made the Order of this Court for reason of the findings made and reasons stated

1

The Parties were given an additional three days because service was made by mail. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d)
(adding three days to specified period within which a party may act if service is made under Rule 5(b)(2)(C) by
mailing process to a party’s last known address).

1

therein. Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 55) is GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s
Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 51) is DENIED. Plaintiff’s § 1983 Complaint (Doc. 2) and
Amended Complaint (Doc. 5) are therefore DISMISSED as to Defendants Allen, Isom, Railey,
Rigsby, Scales, and Thomas.
As ordered by Judge Langstaff (see Doc. 71 at 7), Plaintiff must show cause by the date
ordered within the Recommendation as to why his claims against Defendant Butler should not be
dismissed for failure to serve process.
SO ORDERED, this 18th day of April 2012.
/s/ W. Louis Sands
THE HONORABLE W. LOUIS SANDS,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2