Lee-Bryant #337291 v. Sindles et al - Document 10

Share |
Court Description:

ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 6 and dismissing Plaintiff's complaint for failure to state a claim ; signed by Judge Robert Holmes Bell (Judge Robert Holmes Bell, kcb)

Loading PDF...
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN N O R T H E R N DIVISION L A V E R E LEE-BRYANT #337291, P l a in tif f , F ile No. 2:08-cv-121 v. H O N . ROBERT HOLMES BELL U N K N O W N SINDLES, et al., D e f e n d a n ts . / M E M O R A N D U M OPINION AND ORDER A D O P T I N G THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION O n July 23, 2008, United States Magistrate Judge Timothy P. Greeley issued a Report a n d Recommendation ("R&R"), recommending that Plaintiff Lavere Lee-Bryant's 42 U.S.C. 1983 prisoner civil rights action be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2), 1 9 1 5 A (b ), and 42 U.S.C. 1997e(c), for failure to state a claim. (Dkt. No. 6.) Plaintiff filed o b je c tio n s to the R&R on August 7, 2008. For the reasons that follow, Plaintiff's objections a re denied and the R&R is adopted as the opinion of the Court. T h is Court is required to make a de novo review of those portions of a R&R to which sp e c if ic objections are made, and may accept, reject, or modify any or all of the Magistrate Ju d g e's findings or recommendations. 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). H a v in g conducted the required review of the R&R and Plaintiff's objections thereto, th e Court concludes that the R&R correctly applies the law to Plaintiff's complaint. A c c o r d i n g l y, I T IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's objections to the Report and R e c o m m e n d a tio n of the Magistrate Judge (Dkt. No. 7) are DENIED. I T IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 6) is A P P R O V E D and ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. I T IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Lavere Lee-Bryant's complaint is D I S M I S S E D for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2), 1915A, and 4 2 U.S.C. 1997e(c). I T IS FURTHER ORDERED that this dismissal shall count as a STRIKE for p u rpo ses of 28 U.S.C. 1915(g). I T IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court finds no good-faith basis for appeal w ith in the meaning of 28 U.S.C. 1915(a)(3). Dated: March 2, 2009 /s/ Robert Holmes Bell ROBERT HOLMES BELL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2