HOLMES v. DALRYMPLE et al

Filing 99

ORDER denying as moot 86 89 90 91 92 ; adopting 87 Report and Recommendations. Granting 93 Motion for Extension of Time to File Response 87 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS and will consider his original and amended objections. This case is dismissed and closed. Signed by Judge Dudley H. Bowen on 6/3/14. (cmr)

ORIGINAL

I'q

l
'l ia- Il*! ii
l : r , -r ^ . . . r r ^ Y
,i''li.,tJul{i

r,,.. r.: iA [tl',/.

STATE'DI'TR.ICT
CS{JRT 2[i:,J';i; -3 Fij 3: i7
IN TI{E LntrTEr}
FOR'fHEljotJTHERNDts,rRICToFGEoR.i|.4i]LrR{#
D{JBLIN
DIVISION
HOLlvfES,
MOI{RIS SCOTT'
Plaintifi',
CV 312-i,9!)
BARBARA DALRYMPLE,tloctot,
Pdson, al.,
ec
Johnson
State
Det'endants.

ORT}ER

Aller a careful, de novo rcvret'tof the file. the {lcr.rrtconcurs rvith ihe h,{agistr:rre
Jr.rrige'sRepcrt and Recommentlation" to n'hieh objections htr e been iiled.r The
clisrnissal tliis casebecausoPl*irdiff rvas not entitled
of
Ju<lge
recommencled
fulagistrate
pursuantto the drreestrikes provision of 28 ll.$.C.
to proceedin.fbrma pnuyrcris("1FP".1
Jr-rdge's
Match
$ 1915(9)"and he lailed to pay the tiling f'eeas directed irr ttre N'fagistrate
6.2014Oder. (Doc.no. 87.)

rThe ,.{eadlinelbr suhu-rittingobjections r,,ns h4a;: 1}. 20 t4. (Doc. n*. 88.)
objections
da{edh{a1'21and
PlairitifNsob.iections
datedJ\'lay17,20t.1,and his amended
i
May 23, 2014, are ilieretbreuntimel;". (I)oc. nos. 94, 96. 97.t Hoivever,on h'{a,v 7
'.dricl: rhe
requestinlien exiensiLfi of fime aGlile olrjecti<ins.
Flaintitri also liled a motion
his
a$
Llourl cofl.stnles a .ilotion Io irc.cept otrjec|ionsout of tinre. {l)ot-. no. 93.) In the
motion. Plainriff claisrs he ditl nr"rt receive the Repori :ind Reclrmrnenclalicri and
iLc{rmpanying Order until h.{ay 14. 2011. (I-tIJ Thus, ilie Court GR'dl{TS Plaintitl's
r.rtrjeciions.
arnended
redluest
and lvil] considerhis original zurci

Judgeimproperll' vacatedliis IFP
in his objeetions,Plaintiffargues the h4agistrate
starusbecause does not have three strikes and becausehe n'as in immiuent dangerat
he
the time of tiling sucir that he qualities for the exceptionto $ t9l5(g). (Seedoc. nos. 94,
ihe
argunle{ltslre made in rcsponse
to
96. 97.) However, Plaintilf mereiy reiterates sRrne
f,)eftndanis' nlotion to vacate his IFP status. (Doc. nos. 75. 79.) Furthermore, the
Magistrate Judge discussedPlainiitl's assertionihat he was in irnminent danger at the
time of filing and ftrund his allegationswhollf insut-ficienlto saiisti the exceptilrn(doc.
no. 83, p.4).

Therefore.the Court OVERRULE$ Plaintitls original ancl amended

flon1 ttre conclusionsin the
to
objections becausethey do not provide arly reasLln depa.rt
Report and Reconi,rnendation.
In addition to his objections. Piaintiff lias frled several ur'related motions
requestingthat the Court appoint counsel to replesenthinr, issuean injunction regarding
rnail proceclures his prison, anciaclmit evidenee. (Doc. nos. 89, 90, 91" !)2.) Because
at
the Courl is disrnissingthis casedue to Plaintiff s failure to pay the tiiing fee, the Coixt
DnNIES AS MO{jT' Plaintiff s rnotions.
ion ot' the
Accordingly" the Courl ADOPTS the l{eport and I{ecomrnendaf
lvlagistrateJudgeas its opinion, IIENIES AS &{0OT Plaintiffs motion to compel (doc.

no. 86),andDISMISSDSthis c:u;e.
at
Georgia.
d
SOORDERED risrl(day of J*te. 201.1, Augusta.

I]NITED S1]A

DISTRT{]T