Sadler v. M.S.P.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 6 in full. This dismissal counts as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1915(g). Any appeal of this decision would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Dana L. Christensen on 3/12/2018. Mailed to Sadler (TAG)
MAR 12 2018
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA
Clerk, U.S Courts
District Of Montana
TIMOTHY RAY SADLER,
M.S.P., et al.,
United States Magistrate Judge John T. Johnston entered his Findings and
Recommendations on January 17, 2018, recommending to dismiss Plaintiff
Timothy Sadler's ("Sadler") Complaint (Doc. 2) for failing to state a claim upon
which relief may be granted.
Sadler failed to timely object to the
Findings and Recommendations, and so waived the right to de novo review of the
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1 )(C).
This Court reviews for clear error those
findings and recommendations to which no party objects.
Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir.
1981); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985).
Clear error exists ifthe Court is
left with a "definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed."
United States v. Syrax, 235 F.3d 422, 427 (9th Cir. 2000) (citations omitted).
Having reviewed the Findings and Recommendations, (Doc. 6), the Court
finds no clear error in Judge Johnston's conclusion that Sadler's Complaint should
be dismissed because it violates Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by
failing to bring specific claims and factual allegations against specific defendants.
Judge Johnston specifically concludes that the Complaint is "nearly incoherent"
and fails to allege any claims to which Plaintiff is entitled to relief under 42 U.S.C.
To the extent that Plaintiff uses§ 1983 as a vehicle to
challenge his criminal conviction or to obtain damages resulting from his
conviction, these claims are barred by Heckv. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87
( 1994) (finding that a plaintiff may not recover damages from an allegedly
unconstitutional conviction unless she can prove that her conviction or sentence
has been reversed on direct appeal or otherwise declared invalid.).
conviction has not been reversed, declared invalid, expunged, or called into
question, Judge Johnston did not clearly err in concluding that Sadler's Complaint
fails to state a claim.
Judge Johnston allowed Sadler leave to cure the defects in the Complaint on
or before January 5, 2018.
Sadler failed to do so.
Accordingly, IT IS
(1) Judge Johnston's Findings and Recommendations (Doc. 6) are
ADOPTED IN FULL.
(2) This matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to state a
(3) The Clerk of Court is directed to close this matter and enter judgment in
favor of Defendants pursuant to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
(4) The Clerk of Court is directed to have the docket reflect that the Court
certifies pursuant to Rule 24(a)(3)(A) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure
that any appeal of this decision would not be taken in good faith.
person could suppose an appeal would have merit.
The record makes plain that
the Complaint lacks arguable substance in law or fact.
(5) The Clerk of Court is directed to have the docket reflect that this
dismissal counts as a strike pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) because Plaintiff failed
to state a claim upon which relief may be grante
f"l~ay of March, 2018.
Dana L. Christensen, Chief Judge
United States District Court
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?