Allen v. Traylar et al, No. 4:2015cv00396 - Document 9 (E.D. Ark. 2015)

Court Description: ORDER adopting 5 Proposed Findings and Recommendations in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects. Plaintiff's 2 Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. P laintiff may refile this federal action after his state criminal proceeding, including any appeal, is concluded. Dismissal of this action counts as a strike for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court 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. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 7/17/2015. (ks)

Download PDF
Allen v. Traylar et al Doc. 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JOSHUA L. ALLEN * * * * * * * * * Plaintiff, v. J. TRAYLAR, Deputy, Saline County Sheriff’s Office, et al. Defendants. No. 4:15CV00396-SWW-JJV ORDER The Court has reviewed the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe and Plaintiff’s Objections. After carefully considering the objections and making a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition should be, and hereby are, approved and adopted in their entirety as this Court's findings in all respects. IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. No. 2) is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. Plaintiff may refile this federal action after his state criminal proceeding, including any appeal, is concluded. 2. Dismissal of this action counts as a “strike” for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 3. The Court 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. IT IS SO ORDERED this 16th day of July, 2015. /s/Susan Webber Wright 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.