Alexander #731077 v. Salmi et al
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 58 re 31 ; signed by Judge Gordon J. Quist (Judge Gordon J. Quist, jmt)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
D’ANDRE ALEXANDER #731077,
Case No. 2:16-CV-96
HON. GORDON J. QUIST
MANDI JOY SALMI, et al.,
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On February 13, 2017, Magistrate Judge Greeley issued a Report and Recommendation
recommending that the Court grant in part and deny in part Defendants’ motion for summary
judgment based on Plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies. In particular, the
magistrate judge recommended that the Court grant the motion with regard to Plaintiff’s claims
against Defendants Alexander and Place. The magistrate judge also recommenced that the Court
dismiss Plaintiff’s conspiracy claim for failure to state a claim. The magistrate judge recommended
that the Court deny the motion in all other respects. The Report and Recommendation was duly
served on the parties on February 13, 2017. No objections have been filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b). Therefore the Court will adopt the Report and Recommendation.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the February 13, 2017, Report and Recommendation (ECF
No. 58) is ADOPTED as the Opinion of the Court.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment Based on
Plaintiff’s Failure to Exhaust Administrative Remedies (ECF No. 31) is GRANTED IN PART
AND DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Alexander and Place are
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE based upon lack of exhaustion. Plaintiff’s conspiracy
claim is DISMISSED for failure to state a claim. The motion is DENIED with regard to Plaintiff’s
retaliation claim against Defendant Salmi and Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment, equal protection, and
state law claims against Defendants Salmi, Osier, Bailey-Webb, Boudreau, Robare, Hares, Eyke,
Dated: March 8, 2017
/s/ Gordon J. Quist
GORDON J. QUIST
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?