OWENS v. GEORGIA DIAGNOSTIC AND CLASSIFICATION PRISON et al
Filing
22
ORDER ADOPTING 8 Report and Recommendations and DENYING 4 Motion for TRO/Motion for Preliminary Injunction. The claims against the GDCP are DISMISSED, and the claims against C.O. John Doe and Inmate John Doe are DISMISSED without prejudice. Ordered by U.S. District Judge Marc Thomas Treadwell on 11/5/2013. (tlh)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION
JACKIE DEWAYNE OWENS,
Plaintiff,
v.
GEORGIA DIAGNOSTIC AND
CLASSIFICATION PRISON, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:13-CV-299 (MTT)
ORDER
Before the Court is the Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Stephen Hyles.
(Doc. 8). The Magistrate Judge, having reviewed the Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 1)
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, recommends dismissing the claims against the Georgia
Diagnostic and Classification Prison, C.O. John Doe, and Inmate John Doe. The
Magistrate Judge found the Plaintiff cannot properly assert a claim pursuant to 42
U.S.C. § 1983 against the GDCP. Additionally, the Magistrate Judge found the Plaintiff
did not sufficiently identify C.O. John Doe to allow service of process, and Inmate John
Doe is not subject to suit pursuant to § 1983 because he is not a state actor. The
Magistrate Judge also recommends denying the Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary
restraining order (Doc. 4) because the Plaintiff failed to show this type of extraordinary
relief is warranted. The Plaintiff has not objected to the Recommendation.
The Court has reviewed the Recommendation, and the Recommendation is
adopted and made the order of this Court. The claims against the GDCP are
DISMISSED, and the claims against C.O. John Doe and Inmate John Doe are
DISMISSED without prejudice. Further, the Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary
restraining order (Doc. 4) is DENIED.
SO ORDERED, this the 5th day of November, 2013.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
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?