Thompson v. Erdos et al

Filing 20

ORDER ADOPTING 19 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS : plaintiffs claims against the following defendants: Warden Erdos, Sgt. McCrosky, Officer Shaw, Officer Tacketts unknown partner, Hutchinson, Henderson, C.O. Coleman, and Officer Congus are DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§§1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b)(1). To the extent that plaintiff intended to name Lt. Esham and Rogers as defendants in this action, plaintiffs claims against these individuals are also DISMISSED. Finally, with the exception of plaintiffs retaliation claims against Dillow and Sears based on the September 22, 2016 attack - plaintiffs retaliation claims against Dillow, Sears and Payne are DISMISSED.. Signed by Judge Susan J. Dlott on 1/30/2017. (jlw)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION

Gerald Thompson,
Plaintiff(s),
vs.
Warden Erdos, et al.,
Defendant(s).

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Case Number: 1:16cv812
Judge Susan J. Dlott

ORDER
This matter is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States
Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge
reviewed the pleadings and filed with this Court on November 29, 2016 a Report and
Recommendation (Doc. 11). Subsequently, the plaintiff filed objections to such Report and
Recommendation (Doc. 13).
The Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and
considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the
Court does determine that such Recommendation should be adopted.
Accordingly, plaintiff’s claims against the following defendants: Warden Erdos, Sgt.
McCrosky, Officer Shaw, Officer Tackett’s unknown partner, Hutchinson, Henderson, C.O.
Coleman, and Officer Congus are DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§§1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b)(1).
To the extent that plaintiff intended to name Lt. Esham and Rogers as defendants in this
action, plaintiff’s claims against these individuals are also DISMISSED.

Finally, with the exception of plaintiff’s retaliation claims against Dillow and Sears based
on the September 22, 2016 attack - plaintiff’s retaliation claims against Dillow, Sears and Payne
are DISMISSED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

___s/Susan J. Dlott___________
Judge Susan J. Dlott
United States District Court