From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Watson v. Thomas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION
Jan 2, 2013
1:12-cv-216-IPJ-RRA (N.D. Ala. Jan. 2, 2013)

Opinion

1:12-cv-216-IPJ-RRA

01-02-2013

TERRY DONNELL WATSON, Plaintiff, v. KIM THOMAS, et al., Defendants.


MEMORANDUM OF OPINION

The magistrate judge filed a report and recommendation on October 31, 2012, recommending that this action be dismissed due to plaintiff's failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and for seeking monetary relief against defendants who are immune from such relief, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) and (2). The court allowed the plaintiff two separate extensions of time in which to file written objections, but no objections have been filed.

Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including the report and recommendation, the court is of the opinion that the magistrate judge's report is due to be and is hereby ADOPTED and the recommendation is ACCEPTED. Accordingly, the complaint is due to be dismissed without prejudice due to plaintiff's failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and for seeking monetary relief against defendants who are immune from such relief, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) and (2). A Final Judgment will be entered.

_______________

INGE PRYTZ JOHNSON

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Watson v. Thomas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION
Jan 2, 2013
1:12-cv-216-IPJ-RRA (N.D. Ala. Jan. 2, 2013)
Case details for

Watson v. Thomas

Case Details

Full title:TERRY DONNELL WATSON, Plaintiff, v. KIM THOMAS, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA EASTERN DIVISION

Date published: Jan 2, 2013

Citations

1:12-cv-216-IPJ-RRA (N.D. Ala. Jan. 2, 2013)

Citing Cases

Peterson v. New Hampshire Dep't of Corr.

Furthermore, there is an additional ground for not adding Claim 2 to this case, which is that defendants are…