Dyer v. Medlin et al

Filing 19

ORDER adopting 14 Report and Recommendations and denying as moot 16 Motion. This case is dismissed without prejudice and this civil action is closed. Signed by Judge Dudley H. Bowen on 6/3/13. (cmr)

O IGINAL
R

l'i:...1:.|.
U.r.:,ri ! iriu,

"\.L.

AUG'Ji !li''.
!r3,

IN THE IINITED STATESDISTRICTCOURT

-3
il]ll JU:! f,ll 9, 39

DISTRICTOF GEORGIA
FORTHE SOUTHERN

/1

DL,IBLIN DIVISION

-^

^
t

ILERK9H€xSI*.5.

0r
s0.0tsT. GA.

MICHAEL D, DYER,
Plaintifl

cv 313-019
JASON MEDLIN, Warden,et al.,
Defendants.

ORDER

After a careful, de noyo review of the file, the Court concurswith the Magistrate
("R&R"), to which objectionshave been filed (doc.
Judge'sReporl and Recommendation
nos. 17, 18). Inhis R&R, the MagistrateJudge without reachingthe merits of Plaintiffs
claims recommended Plaintiff s complaintbedismissed
that
due to his abuse thejudicial
of
process failing to disclosetwo prior cases
by
that he had filed in federalcourt. @oc. no. 14.)
part of which concernthe merits ofhis claims and
In his lengthy objections- a considerable
his ongoing problems at WheelerCorrectionalFacility and thereforedo not warrant further
discussion- Plaintiff assertsthat, although he completed the complaint forms for his
previoustwo cases
and deliveredthem to the properofficers at his place ofincarcerationfor
mailing rvith the conect postageaffixed, the ensuingrulings enteredin those caseswere
neverforwarded him followinghis transfer a new location.(Doc.no. 17,p. l;doc.no.
to
to
18, p. 1.) Thus, Plaintiff appears contendthat he was unawareof the fact that the cases
to
he preparedrvereindeed filed in federalcourt. (Doc. nos, 17, 18.)

The Courl finds Plaintiffs argumententirely unpersuasive,
especiallyconsidering
that the "Form to Be Used by Prisonersin Filing a Complaint Under the Civil Rights Act,
42 U.S.C. $ 1983" simply directs the prisoner to disclose whether he has brought any
previouslawsuitsin federalcourt while incarcerated detained. (Seedoc. no. 8, p. 2.) By
or
steptowardsfiling a lawsuit on two
his own admission,Plaintiffcarried out everynecessary
separateoccasions,in that he completedthe correct form, affixed the proper amount of
postage,and delivered the form to the appropriatedetention center olficers for mailing.
(Doc. no. 17, p. 1.) The fact that subsequent
court ordersin those cases
were not delivered
to him as a result ofhis being transferred
doesnot somehowequate a finding that Plaintiff
to
simply had no knowledge that he filed those cases.r Thus, Plaintiffs objections are
OVERRULED.
Accordrngly,theReportandRecommendation
ofthe Magistrate
Judge ADOPTED
is
asthe opinion ofthe Court. Therefore,this caseis DISMISSED without prejudice,andthis
civil actionis CLOSED.?

SOORDERED
this

ES DISTRICTILD

'Moreover, Plaintiff conveniently fails
to indicate whether he made any attempt
whatsoever keepthe Court apprised
to
ofhis currentaddress
afterhewas transferred anew
to
place of incarceration.
?Giventhe Court's ruling that this
civil action is closed,plaintiff s May 3,2013
motionrequesting
subpoenas DENIED asMOOT. (Doc. no. 16.)
is