Stevens v. United States et al
Filing
66
ORDER ADOPTING the Magistrate Judge's 61 Report and Recommendation as the opinion of the Court and OVERRULES Plaintiff's Objections. The Court GRANTS Defendants' 39 Motion to Dismiss, DISMISSES without prejudice Plaintiff's Complaint, and DISMISSES as moot Defendants' 36 Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court also DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal and to CLOSE this case and DENIES Plaintiff in forma pauperis status on appeal. Signed by Chief Judge Lisa G. Wood on 3/28/2017. (csr)
Mmteb ^tates( Btsitrtct Conrt
Jfor t^t ^ontliient Bisstrtct ot <§eorgta
PtttnsitDttk litiitsiton
RAYFORD STEVENS,
Plaintiff,
CIVIL ACTION NO.: 2:14-cv-178
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; DR.
PETER LIBERO; PA B. AREMU; and MRS.
MOON,
Defendants.
ORDER
After an independent and de novo review of the entire
record, the undersigned concurs with the Magistrate Judge's
Report and Recommendation dated February 10, 2017, dkt. no.
to which Plaintiff filed Objections, dkt. no. 65.
61,
Plaintiff's
Objections are little more than an iteration of assertions he
has made on previous occasions,
including in his Response to
Defendants'
Dkt.
Motion to
Dismiss.
No.
42.
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's Report
and Recommendation as the opinion of the Court and OVERRULES
Plaintiff's Objections.
The Court GRANTS Defendants' Motion to
Dismiss, DISMISSES without prejudice Plaintiff's Complaint, and
DISMISSES as moot Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment.
A0 72A
(Rev. 8/82)
The
Court also DIRECTS the Clerk of Court to enter the appropriate
judgment of dismissal and to CLOSE this case and DENIES
Plaintiff in forma pauperis status on appeal.
SO ORDERED, this
day of
/I
G0t>BEY WOOD, CHIEF JUDGE
united' states district court
SOUTHERN district OF GEORGIA
A0 72A
(Rev. 8/82)
t 2017.
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?