Ring v. Roork et al, No. 1:2019cv00054 - Document 9 (E.D. Ark. 2020)
Court Description: ORDER approving and adopting in their entirety 6 Proposed Findings and Recommendations as the Court's findings in all respects; dismissing without prejudice 2 Mr. Ring's Complaint; counting dismissal of this action as a "strike;" and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 2/11/2020. (kdr)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Ring v. Roork et al Doc. 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS NORTHERN DIVISION WILLIAM EARL RING, III v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 1:19-cv-00054-KGB-JJV ALBERT ROORK, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommendations submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe. J Volpe (Dkt. No. 6). Plaintiff William Earl Ring, III has not filed any objections, and the time to file objections has passed. After carefully considering the record in this case, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommendations should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court’s findings in all respects. The Court dismisses without prejudice Mr. Ring’s complaint (Dkt. No. 2). Dismissal of this action counts as a “strike” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court also certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith. Judgment shall be entered accordingly. It is so ordered this 11th day of February, 2020. Kristine G. Baker United States District Judge Dockets.Justia.com
]]>
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.
