Henry v. Vermont Department of Corrections et al

Filing 29

OPINION AND ORDER Adopting 28 Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation granting 19 defendant Bradley's Motion to Dismiss plaintiff's claims against him in his individual capacity. Plaintiff's Complaint is dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge Christina Reiss on 1/26/2017. (pac)

Download PDF
U.S, fHSTRlCf .. IHSTftlCT V af FtLEB UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF VERMONT JONATHAN HENRY, Plaintiff, v. VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and JEREMY BRADLEY, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 2011 JAN 27 AH 9: 52 CLE!K BY IEf.J(Wbllt Case No. 2:16-cv-41 OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (Docs. 19 & 28) This matter came before the court for a review of the Magistrate Judge's October 26, 2016 Report and Recommendation ("R & R") (Doc. 28), in which he recommended that the court grant Defendant Jeremy Bradley's motion to dismiss Plaintiffs claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against him in his individual capacity. (Doc. 19.) The court had previously dismissed the claims against Defendant Bradley in his official capacity. On September 16, 2016, Plaintiff responded that he would not file a substantive reply because he expected the court to grant the motion. On October 21, 2016, during a status conference before the Magistrate Judge, Plaintiffs counsel advised that "there is no factual basis for [Plaintiff] to show that he exhausted his available administrative remedies before filing [his] lawsuit," and that Plaintiff therefore "could not oppose [Defendant] Bradley's [m]otion to [d]ismiss in good faith." (Doc. 28 at 2.) Neither party has filed an objection to the R & R, and the time period to do so has expired. A district judge must make a de novo determination of those portions of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation to which an objection is made. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l); Cullen v. United States, 194 F.3d 401, 405 (2d Cir. 1999). The district judge may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b )(1); accord Cullen, 194 F.3d at 405. A district judge, however, is not required to review the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of a report and recommendation to which no objections are addressed. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). Because Plaintiff does not oppose Defendant Bradley's motion to dismiss, the court adopts the Magistrate Judge's conclusions and adopts the R & R in its entirety. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the court hereby ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's R & R (Doc. 28) as the court's Opinion and Order, and GRANTS Defendant Bradley's motion to dismiss Plaintiffs claims against him in his individual capacity. (Doc. 19.) Plaintiffs Complaint is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. SO ORDERED. ~ Dated at Burlington, in the District of Vermont, this ,?II day of January, 2017. ~e United States District Court 2

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?