Casado v. Hastings et al

Filing 31

ORDER ADOPTING the Magistrate Judge's 25 Report and Recommendations. ORDER Dismissing as moot 27 Motion to Appoint Counsel; Motion for a Status Update, and 28 Motion for Court Order for Service of Summons. Plaintiff's Complaint, as amended, is DISMISSED. Plaintiff is DENIED leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. However, Plaintiff's Motion for Docket Sheet is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to provide Plaintiff with a copy of the docket sheet at no charge to Plaintiff. Signed by Chief Judge Lisa G. Wood on 8/27/2015. (csr)

n the Uniteb btateo Dttritt (Court
for the boutbern Jitritt Of 4eorta
&untuick flibiion
EFRAIN CASADO,
Plaintiff,
V.

SUZANNE R. HASTINGS; ALLEN L.
ADAMS; OFFICER REYNOLDS; AREMU
BOLAJI; and OFFICER PIERCE,
Defendants.

*
*
*
*
*
*
*

CIVIL ACTION NO.: CV214-135

*
*

IJI II 4

Presently before the Court are Plaintiff's Objections to
the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation dated
May 13, 2015. Dkt. No. 25. After an independent and de novo
review of the entire record, the Court OVERRULES Plaintiff's
Objections, dkt. no. 29, and concurs with the Magistrate Judge's
Report and Recommendation.
Through his Amended Complaint, Plaintiff, who is housed at
the Federal Correctional Institution in Jesup, Georgia, set
forth allegations that a drug test incorrectly indicated he had
used an illegal substance during his current period of
incarceration. Dkt. Nos. 21. The Magistrate Judge, after a
thorough analysis of Plaintiff's claims, found that Plaintiff's

AO 72A

(Rev. 8/82)

Amended Complaint should be dismissed in its entirety.
Specifically, the Magistrate Judge recommended that Plaintiff's
official capacity claims, his claims against Defendant Hastings
and the Southeast Regional Director, and his due process,
deliberate indifference, negligence, equal protection,
conspiracy, and legal mail claims be dismissed and Plaintiff's
request for injunctive relief be denied. Dkt. No. 25,

pp. 5-13.

Plaintiff filed Objections to the Report and
Recommendation. Dkt. No. 29. In his Objections, Plaintiff
asserts that the Court failed to address his "drug threshold
amount result." Id. at p. 1. According to Plaintiff, this
claim deals with a violation of his right to due process and the
negligent acts of prison officials.
Contrary to Plaintiff's contention, the Magistrate Judge
addressed all of Plaintiff's claims in the Report and
Recommendation. As to Plaintiff's specific due process and
violation of policy claims, the Magistrate Judge determined a
violation of policy is not a viable constitutional claim. Dkt.
No. 25, p. 6. In addition, the Magistrate Judge found that
Plaintiff failed to set forth a procedural or a substantive due
process claim resulting from the drug testing process. Id. at
pp. 6-9. Plaintiff's Objections reveal his displeasure with the
Magistrate Judge's recommendations, but this is not a sufficient
basis on which to reject the Magistrate Judge's recommendations.
A072A
(Rev. 8182)

II

II

2

For these reasons, Plaintiff's Objections, dkt. no. 29, are
OVERRULED, and the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation

is adopted as the opinion of the Court. Plaintiff's Complaint,
as amended, is DISMISSED.

The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to

enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal and to CLOSE this
case. Further, Plaintiff is DENIED leave to proceed in forma
pauperis on appeal.

Because this Order entirely resolves this case, Plaintiff's
Motion to Appoint Counsel, Motion for a Status Update, and
Motion for Service of Summons, dkt. nos. 27, 28, are DISMISSED
as moot. Plaintiff's Objections to the Magistrate Judge's
Report and Recommendation dated November 17, 2014, are also
DISMISSED as moot. Dkt. Nos. 11, 14. However, Plaintiff's

Motion for Docket Sheet, dkt. no. 30, is GRANTED.

The Clerk of

Court is DIRECTED to provide Plaintiff with a copy of the docket
sheet at no charge to Plaintiff.
SO ORDERED, this

1/11day

of

2015.

LISA GODBEX 'WcD9 çEF JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN/DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

AO 72A
(Rev.
(Rev. 8/82)

I

3