Finn v. Medlin et al
Filing
17
ORDER adopting 9 Report and Recommendations. Therefore, certain claims are dismissed and the following defendants are dismissed, CCA, Warden Medlin, Quinn, Miles, Harris, Smith, Day, Phillips, and John & Jane Does. Signed by Judge Dudley H. Bowen on 10/08/13. (cmr)
fIRIGINAL
l
u.s.
orslrllFQ.n,,o'
j:4 "
t':'
_ r'
?08 -8 A q 35
ocr
DISTRICT GEORCIA
FORTHE SOUTHERN
OF
IN THE L]NITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURT
DUBLIN DIVISION
C! rtrz
/-n
l_' f.j, r l-ar.1(
-twtt.u+!_
MICHAEL S.FINN.SR..
Plaintifi
cv 313-026
JASONMEDLIN, Warden, a1.,
et
Defendants.
ORDER
After a careful,de novorcviewof the file, the Courtconcurs
with the Magistrate
Judge's
ReportandRecommendation, which objections
to
havebeenfiled (doc.no. 15).'
Accordingly,the ReportandRecommendation the Magistrate
of
Judge ADOPTED as
is
the opinion of the Court. Therefore,
Plaintiffs following claimsare DISMISSED for
failure to statea claim upon which relief may be granted: his free exercise,
Religious
Persons
Act ("RLUIPA"), and retaliationclaims; his
Land Use and Institutionalized
with Disabilities of 1990('ADA') against
Act
claimsunderTitle II of the Americans
the
CorrectionsCorporation America ("CCA"); his claim under Title II of the ADA
of
againstWardenMedlin, and Defendants
Quinn,Miles, Harris,Smith,Day, Phillips,and
Doesin their official andindividualcapacities; his claim underTitle II
and
JohnandJane
in
Commissioner
Owens his individualcapacity.Further,
Defendants
of the ADA against
'Plaintiff requested,
and was granted,an extensionof time in which to object to
the Report and Recommendation.(Doc. nos. 12, 13.)
CCA, Warden Medlin, Quinn, Miles, Harris, Smith, Day, Phillips, and John and Jane
DoesareDISMISSED.2
lt9
rl'
2013,at Augusta,
Georgia.
this J dayof October,
SO ORDERED
'As explained the Magistrate
Judge's
Orderof July 25, 2013,Plaintiff s claim
in
Owensin his official capacityshall
under Title II of the ADA againstCommissioner
proceed.
(See
no. 11.)
doc.
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?