Opinion
1:10CV723.
December 1, 2010
ORDER
On September 21, 2010, the United States Magistrate Judge's Recommendation was filed and notice was served on the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. (Docs. 3 and 4.) Plaintiff filed objections to the Recommendation within the time limit prescribed by section 636. (Doc. 5.) On October 5, 2010, the Magistrate Judge entered an order regarding the requirements of the Prison Litigation Reform Act and, on October 12, 2010, modified that Order. (Docs. 8 and 21.) The court mailed notice of both the Order and modification to Plaintiff. (Docket Entries dated Oct. 5 and 12, 2010.) Plaintiff timely objected to the modification. (Doc. 23.) In addition, Plaintiff filed a number of other documents (see Docs. 22, and 24-27), which the Magistrate Judge disposed of by Order on November 11, 2010 (Doc. 28). The court mailed Plaintiff notice of that Order, as well. (Docket Entry dated Nov. 11, 2010.) Plaintiff filed no objection to the Order of November 11, 2010, but rather filed a document stating that he intended to pursue such matters in another court. (See Doc. 30.)
The court has reviewed Plaintiff's objections de novo and finds they do not change the substance of the United States Magistrate Judge's Recommendation of September 21, 2010, or the Order of October 12, 2010, which are affirmed and adopted.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A for being frivolous, for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, and for seeking monetary relief against defendants who are immune from such relief.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, for the same reasons given for dismissal, the court finds that any appeal would not be in good faith and permission to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis is denied pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) and Fed.R.App.P. 24.
December 1, 2010