Opinion
CASE NO. 4:12-cv-753
01-10-2014
JOHN MARGETIS, et al. Plaintiffs, v. HON. WILLIAM ROYAL FERGUSON, et al. Defendants.
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Came on for consideration the report of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action, this matter having been heretofore referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On September 13, 2013, the report of the Magistrate Judge was entered containing proposed findings of fact and recommendations that Defendants the Hon. William Royal Furgeson, Jr., the Hon. Stacey G. C. Jernigan, and Deputy U.S. Marshal John Barron's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim (Dkt. 16) be GRANTED, that all named Defendants and doe Defendants be dismissed with prejudice, and that all costs be charged to Plaintiffs.
The court has made a de novo review of the objections raised by Plaintiffs and Defendants' response (see Dkts. 30 & 33) and is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and the objections are without merit as to the ultimate findings of the Magistrate Judge. The court hereby adopts the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge as the findings and conclusions of this court.
Therefore, Defendants the Hon. William Royal Furgeson, Jr., the Hon. Stacey G. C. Jernigan, and Deputy U.S. Marshal John Barron's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim (Dkt. 16) is GRANTED, all named Defendants and doe Defendants are dismissed with prejudice, and all costs shall be charged to Plaintiffs.
The court will address Defendants' Motion for Sanctions (Dkt. 34) in a separate order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
_______________
RICHARD A. SCHELL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE