RUFFIN v. HINKLEY et al, No. 2:2017cv00151 - Document 23 (D. Me. 2017)
Court Description: ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE - adopting Report and Recommended Decision re 22 Report and Recommendations. By JUDGE NANCY TORRESEN. (mnw)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
RUFFIN v. HINKLEY et al Doc. 23 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE DANIEL ONEIL RUFFIN, Plaintiff, v. JOHN HINKLEY, et al., Defendants ) ) ) ) ) ) Docket no. 2:17-cv-151-NT ) ) ) ) ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE On August 25, 2017, the United States Magistrate Judge filed with the court, with a copy to the Plaintiff, his Recommended Decision after a preliminary review of the Plaintiff’s Complaint under 28 U.S.C.§ 1915. Recommended Decision (ECF No. 22). The time within which to file objections has expired, and no objections have been filed. The Magistrate Judge notified the Plaintiff that failure to object would waive their right to de novo review and appeal. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED. The Plaintiff’s claims regarding access to the courts and the denial of adequate meals are DISMISSED and I ORDER service of the complaint, the amended complaint, and the supplement to the amended complaint on the Defendants Warren Heath, Dennis Palmer, John Hinkley, Cynthia Gardner, and Timothy McFarland. SO ORDERED. /s/ Nancy Torresen United States Chief District Judge Dated this 2nd day of October, 2017. 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.
