Opinion
Case No. 1:18-cv-386
08-22-2018
GARY LEE PULLEN, Plaintiff, v. DIRECTOR GARY C. MOHR, et al., Defendants.
Dlott, J.
AMENDED REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On July 10, 2018, the undersigned issued a Report and Recommendation in this prisoner civil rights action. (See Doc. 5). Plaintiff named seventy-seven defendants in his complaint and included factual allegations from multiple institutions and unrelated incidents. Upon review of the complaint, the undersigned concluded that plaintiff should be permitted to proceed with his First and Eighth Amendment claims against defendants Dillow, Crabtree, Bear, Sears, Holbrook, Smith, Smoot, Rogers, Conley, Claggs, Warren, Joiner, Tipton, and Ross. (See Doc. 5 at PageID 163-64, 171). It was recommended that plaintiff's claims unrelated to the alleged January 7, 2017 attack and subsequent retaliation be dismissed without prejudice, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 21, and that the remaining claims be dismissed with prejudice, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b)(1). (See id. at PageID 172).
However, the recommendation inadvertently omitted defendant Bear from the defendants against which plaintiff should be permitted to proceed. (See id.). Accordingly, the recommendation in the July 10, 2018 Report and Recommendation is amended as follows:
IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT:
Plaintiff's claims that are unrelated to the alleged January 7, 2017 attack and subsequent retaliation should be DISMISSED without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 21.
The complaint otherwise be DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b)(1), with the exception of plaintiff's First and Eighth Amendment claims against defendants Dillow, Crabtree, Bear, Sears, Holbrook, Smith, Smoot, Rogers, Conley, Claggs, Warren, Joiner, Tipton, and Ross.
IT IS SO RECOMMENDED. Date: 8/22/18
/s/_________
Karen L. Litkovitz
United States Magistrate Judge
NOTICE
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), WITHIN 14 DAYS after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition, a party may serve and file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations. This period may be extended further by the Court on timely motion for an extension. Such objections shall specify the portions of the Report objected to and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the objections. If the Report and Recommendation is based in whole or in part upon matters occurring on the record at an oral hearing, the objecting party shall promptly arrange for the transcription of the record, or such portions of it as all parties may agree upon, or the Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless the assigned District Judge otherwise directs. A party may respond to another party's objections WITHIN 14 DAYS after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).