MCBROOM STEES v. GUARD, MAINE STATE PRISON et al
Filing
43
ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE 37 and denying 33 Motion for Summary Judgment and 33 Motion to Dismiss; and denying Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Scheduling Order 30 . By JUDGE GEORGE Z. SINGAL. (MSH)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of Maine
WILLIAM MCBROOM STEES,
Plaintiff
v.
GUARD, MAINE STATE PRISON,
et als.,
Defendant
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 1:14-CV-00133-GZS
ORDER AFFIRMING THE
RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on January 26, 2015, his
Recommended Decision (ECF No. 37). Plaintiff filed his Objection to the Recommended Decision
(ECF No. 39) on February 6, 2015. Defendants filed their Objection to the Recommended Decision
(ECF No. 40) on February 9, 2015. Defendants filed their Response to Plaintiff’s Objection to the
Recommended Decision (ECF No. 41) on February 20, 2015. Plaintiff filed his Response to
Defendants’ Objection to the Recommended Decision (ECF No. 42) on February 23, 2015.
I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together
with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the
Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United
States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in his Recommended Decision, and determine that
no further proceeding is necessary.
1.
It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge
is hereby AFFIRMED.
2.
It is hereby ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and Motion for
Summary Judgment (ECF No. 33) is DENIED.
3.
It is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Scheduling Order (ECF No. 30) is
DENIED.
4.
The issue whether Plaintiff has exhausted his administrative remedies will be
determined by this Court after an evidentiary hearing.
/s/George Z. Singal_____________
U.S. District Judge
Dated this 25th day of February, 2015.
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?