SPARKS v. JOHNSON et al

Filing 27

ORDER ADOPTING 26 Report and Recommendations; DENYING 6 Motion for TRO; DENYING 7 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; DENYING 8 Motion to Amend/Correct; and GRANTING 15 Motion to Dismiss Complaint. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE MARC THOMAS TREADWELL on 9/10/2015. (tlh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
MACON DIVISION
JASON EMANUEL SPARKS,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
OFFICER JOHNSON, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
________________________________ )

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:14-CV-352 (MTT)

ORDER
United States Magistrate Judge Stephen Hyles recommends granting the
Defendants’ motion to dismiss the Plaintiff’s complaint because he failed to exhaust his
administrative remedies and denying the Plaintiff’s motions for a temporary restraining
order, appointment of counsel, and leave to amend his complaint. (Doc. 26). The
Plaintiff has not objected to the Recommendation. The Court has reviewed the
Recommendation, and the Court accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions, and
recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. The Recommendation is ADOPTED and
made the order of this Court. Accordingly, the Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doc. 15)
is GRANTED, and the Plaintiff’s motion for a temporary restraining order (Doc. 6),
motion for appointment of counsel (Doc. 7), and motion for leave to amend his
complaint1 (Doc. 8) are DENIED. The complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice.
SO ORDERED, this 10th day of September, 2015.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
1

Although leave to amend should be “freely give[n] ... when justice so requires,” Fed. R. Civ. P.
15(a)(2), “denial of leave to amend is justified by futility when the complaint as amended is still
subject to dismissal.” Hall v. United Ins. Co. of Am., 367 F.3d 1255, 1263 (11th Cir. 2004)
(citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Because the Plaintiff’s proposed amendment
does not address his failure to exhaust, amendment would be futile.