Marlow v. The Tennessee Supreme Court et al

Filing 71

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: Accordingly, the Court hereby rules as follows: (1) The Report and Recommendation (Docket Entry No. 56 ) is hereby ACCEPTED and APPROVED; (2) Defendant National Conference of Bar Examiners' Motion t o Dismiss Plaintiffs' [sic] Amended Complaint (Docket Entry No. 39 ) is hereby GRANTED; (3) The Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint against Defendants Clark, Holder, Koch, Lee, Wade, Anderson, Miller, Bibb, McGinness, Jr., Moses, Wilkins, Ga trell, Rice, Copeland and Watts (Docket Entry No. 41 ) is hereby GRANTED; (4) The Motion to Compel Disclosure of Information and to Provide Identification of Person(s) Providing Information to Defendants Related to Plaintiff's Character and Fitness and the Emergency Petition for Temporary Restraining Order against all Defendants and Motion to Compel Production and Inspection (Docket Entry Nos. 67 and 68 ) are hereby DENIED as moot; (5) This case is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDIC E; and (6) Any appeal shall be certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) as taken in good faith. The Clerk is directed to enter Judgment in a separate document in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. It is SO ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 9/9/2014. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(hb)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
ROBERT BENTLEY MARLOW,
Plaintiff,
v.
THE TENNESEE SUPREME
COURT, et al.
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 3:12-cv-0646
Judge Sharp
Magistrate Judge Bryant

)
)
ORDER

Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation (“R & R”) of the Magistrate
Judge, recommending that Defendant National Conference of Bar Examiners’ Motion to Dismiss
Plaintiffs’ [sic] Amended Complaint and the Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint against
Defendants Clark, Holder, Koch, Lee, Wade, Anderson, Miller, Bibb, McGinness, Jr., Moses,
Wilkins, Gatrell, Rice, Copeland and Watts (Docket Entry Nos. 39 and 41) be granted and the
case be dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff made a timely objection to the R & R. (Docket Entry
No. 60).
Having thoroughly reviewed the record in this case and the applicable law in accordance
with Rule 72(b), the Court will accept the R & R.
Accordingly, the Court hereby rules as follows:
(1) The Report and Recommendation (Docket Entry No. 56) is hereby ACCEPTED and
APPROVED;
(2) Defendant National Conference of Bar Examiners’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ [sic]
Amended Complaint (Docket Entry No. 39) is hereby GRANTED;

1

(3) The Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint against Defendants Clark, Holder, Koch,
Lee, Wade, Anderson, Miller, Bibb, McGinness, Jr., Moses, Wilkins, Gatrell, Rice, Copeland and
Watts (Docket Entry No. 41) is hereby GRANTED;
(4) The Motion to Compel Disclosure of Information and to Provide Identification of
Person(s) Providing Information to Defendants Related to Plaintiff’s Character and Fitness and
the Emergency Petition for Temporary Restraining Order against all Defendants and Motion to
Compel Production and Inspection (Docket Entry Nos. 67 and 68) are hereby DENIED as moot;
(5) This case is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE; and
(6) Any appeal shall be certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) as taken in good faith.
The Clerk is directed to enter Judgment in a separate document in accordance with
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58.
It is SO ORDERED.

_________________________________________
KEVIN H. SHARP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2