Locke v. Puckett et al, No. 5:2020cv01701 - Document 44 (N.D. Ala. 2022)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER - The parties' failure to file specific objections waives any challenge to the proposed findings and recommendations. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 11th Cir. 3-1. The court therefore ADOPTS the magistrate judge 9;s report and ACCEPTS his recommendations. The court GRANTS Ms. Clopton's motion for summary judgment and WILL ENTER SUMMARY JUDGMENT in her favor and against Mr. Locke on all claims asserted against her. The court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Mr. Pace and Mr. Mukaddam's motion for summary judgment and WILL ENTER SUMMARY JUDGMENT in their favor and against Mr. Locke on all official capacity claims against them. Mr. Locke's claim for excessive force against Mr. Pace and Mr. Locke's claim for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs against Mr. Mukaddam will proceed. Signed by Judge Annemarie Carney Axon on 3/9/2022. (KEK)

Download PDF
Locke v. Puckett et al Doc. 44 FILED 2022 Mar-09 PM 03:59 U.S. DISTRICT COURT N.D. OF ALABAMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHEASTERN DIVISION GARY BRUCE LOCKE, JR., Plaintiff, v. NAIDEEN CLOPTON, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 5:20-cv-01701-ACA-NAD MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On February 4, 2022, the magistrate judge entered a report recommending that the court (1) grant Defendant Naideen Clopton’s motion for summary judgment and (2) grant in part and deny in part Defendants Sean Mukaddam and Jordan Pace’s motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 43). Specifically, the magistrate judge recommended granting summary judgment in favor of Ms. Clopton on all claims against her; granting summary judgment in favor of Mr. Mukaddam and Mr. Pace on the official capacity claims against them; denying summary judgment on the claim that Mr. Pace used excessive force against Plaintiff Gary Bruce Locke, Jr., and denying summary judgment on the claim that Mr. Mukaddam was deliberately indifferent to Mr. Locke’s serious medical need. (Doc. 43). The magistrate judge notified the parties of their right to object and warned them that failure to object waives the right to challenge on appeal any unobjected-to factual and legal Dockets.Justia.com conclusions. (Id. at 28). The deadline for objections has passed without receipt of any objections. The parties’ failure to file specific objections waives any challenge to the proposed findings and recommendations. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 11th Cir. 3-1. The court therefore ADOPTS the magistrate judge’s report and ACCEPTS his recommendations. The court GRANTS Ms. Clopton’s motion for summary judgment and WILL ENTER SUMMARY JUDGMENT in her favor and against Mr. Locke on all claims asserted against her. The court GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Mr. Pace and Mr. Mukaddam’s motion for summary judgment and WILL ENTER SUMMARY JUDGMENT in their favor and against Mr. Locke on all official capacity claims against them. Mr. Locke’s claim for excessive force against Mr. Pace and Mr. Locke’s claim for deliberate indifference to serious medical needs against Mr. Mukaddam will proceed. The court will enter a separate partial judgment consistent with this memorandum opinion and order. The court REFERS the remaining claims to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. 2 DONE and ORDERED this March 9, 2022. _________________________________ ANNEMARIE CARNEY AXON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.