Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:15-CV-202 (MTT)
02-10-2016
JUSTIN CLARK, Plaintiff, v. BRIAN OWENS, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
United States Magistrate Judge Stephen Hyles recommends granting the Defendants' motion to dismiss and denying the Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. (Doc. 61). The Plaintiff moved for an extension of time "to gather the information needed to file the correct motion in the court's decision to dismiss," and the Court granted the Plaintiff's motion. (Docs. 62; 63). The Plaintiff has now requested "that he be allowed to recast his complaint since it is still within the time limits of all charges." (Doc. 64). Other than this request, the Plaintiff has not objected to the Recommendation. The Court has reviewed the Recommendation, and the Court accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. The Recommendation is ADOPTED and made the order of this Court. Accordingly, the Defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. 47) is GRANTED, and the Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. 41) is DENIED. The Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice.
The Plaintiff has failed to describe the substance of his proposed amendment. Long v. Satz, 181 F.3d 1275, 1279-80 (11th Cir. 1999). Moreover, recasting the complaint would be futile because no amendment can cure the Plaintiff's failure to exhaust his administrative remedies before filing suit. See Cockrell v. Sparks, 510 F.3d 1307, 1310 (11th Cir. 2007) ("Leave to amend a complaint is futile when the complaint as amended would still be properly dismissed or be immediately subject to summary judgment for the defendant."); Smith v. Terry, 491 F. App'x 81 (11th Cir. 2012). Accordingly, the Plaintiff's motion (Doc. 64) is DENIED. --------
SO ORDERED, this 10th day of February, 2016.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT