May v. Patton et al

Filing 42

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 41 and dismissing this action without prejudice. Signed by Honorable Vicki Miles-LaGrange on 8/10/2016. (ks)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
JOHN MAY,
Plaintiff,
vs.
D.O.C. DIRECTOR PATTON, et al.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. CIV-14-418-M

ORDER
On June 30, 2016, United States Magistrate Judge Charles B. Goodwin issued a Report and
Recommendation in this action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that state officials
have violated and are violating various rights guaranteed to plaintiff by federal and state law. The
Magistrate Judge recommended that plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed in its entirety. Specifically,
the Magistrate Judge recommended that plaintiff’s claims challenging ODOC’s copayment and
“forced double celling” policies should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted and plaintiff’s remaining claims should be dismissed without
prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff was advised of his right to object to the
Report and Recommendation by July 21, 2016. A review of the file reveals no objection has been
filed.
Upon de novo review, the Court:
(1)

ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation [docket no. 41] issued by the Magistrate
Judge on June 30, 2016, and

(2)

DISMISSES this action without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 10th day of August, 2016.