Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO.: CV209-139.
August 19, 2011
ORDER
After an independent and de novo review, the undersigned concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Objections have been filed. Plaintiffs Objections address his allegations that he has not been able to obtain discovery from Defendants, which has prevented Plaintiff from showing any actual injury he may have suffered.
It appears that Plaintiff misunderstands the Magistrate Judge's "actual injury" analysis within the context of Plaintiff's claim that Defendant Jackson's actions violated his access to the courts. Plaintiff was required to present evidence which reveals the existence of a genuine dispute as to whether or not he suffered an "actual injury" to his "nonfrivolous prosecution of either a direct appeal of a conviction, a habeas petition, or a civil rights suit []", Hyland v. Parker, 163 F. App'x 793, 798 (11th Cir. 2006), as a result of Defendant Jackson's alleged confiscation or destruction of Plaintiffs legal materials. Plaintiff failed to do so, despite the opportunities afforded. Plaintiff's ability or inability to obtain discovery purportedly in the possession of Defendants has no bearing on Plaintiff's burden in this case. Defendants are entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law.
Plaintiff's Objections are overruled. Defendants' converted Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, and Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED. The Clerk of Court is authorized to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal.