Williams v. Carpenter et al

Filing 58

ORDER: The R & R (Docket No. 54 ) is ACCEPTED and APPROVED; Defendant Messenger's Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 34 ) is GRANTED; Defendants Carpenter's, Slayman's, and Messenger's Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 40 ) is GRA NTED; and (4) Plaintiffs' "Motions to Keep Defendants On Case" (Docket Nos. 42 & 48 ) are DENIED. This case is returned to Magistrate Judge Knowles Signed by Chief Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 9/30/15. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(afs)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION DANIEL LAMONT WILLIAMS #398170, Plaintiff, v. WARDEN WAYNE CARPENTER, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 3:14-01812 Judge Sharp ORDER Pending before the Court is a Report & Recommendation (“R & R”) (Docket No. 54) which recommends that Defendant Messenger’s Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6) (Docket No. 34) be granted, and that Defendants Carpenter’s, Messenger’s and Slayman’s Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 40) for failure to exhaust remedies under 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a) also be granted. Plaintiff has filed no objections to the R & R, and the time for doing so has expired. Having conducted a de novo review of the record in accordance with Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court agrees with the recommended disposition. Accordingly, the Court rules as follows: (1) The R & R (Docket No. 54) is ACCEPTED and APPROVED; (2) Defendant Messenger’s Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 34) is GRANTED; (3) Defendants Carpenter’s, Slayman’s, and Messenger’s Motion to Dismiss (Docket No. 40) is GRANTED; and (4) Plaintiffs’ “Motions to Keep Defendants On Case” (Docket Nos. 42 & 48) are DENIED. This case is returned to Magistrate Judge Knowles. It is SO ORDERED. ____________________________________ KEVIN H. SHARP 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?