From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. Wiley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
May 17, 2012
Civil Action No. 11-CV-15585 (E.D. Mich. May. 17, 2012)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 11-CV-15585

05-17-2012

ROOSEVELT WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. DENNIS M. WILEY, et al., Defendants.


HON. MARK A. GOLDSMITH


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is presently before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of Magistrate Judge Laurie J. Michelson, entered on March 19, 2012. Dkt. 6. The R&R recommends that Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed for violation of the "three strikes" provision of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

Plaintiff's objections (Dkt. 8), signed on April 5, 2012, appear to be untimely. Even if the Court were to consider the objections, however, it would reject them. As the R&R explains, in at least three prior cases, judges of this Court concluded that Plaintiff had already had three strikes. Accordingly, there is no question concerning Plaintiff's three-strike status. Plaintiff's objections do nothing to undermine this conclusion. Plaintiff argues that the three-strike rule is unconstitutional, an argument that has been rejected on numerous occasions. See, e.g., Williams v. Hotchkiss, No. 08-13959 (E.D. Mich.), Opinion of 10/22/08 at 2 (Dkt. 5) (listing the numerous courts of appeals upholding the rule's constitutionality). Plaintiff also appears to argue that there is a distinction between "natural person" "Roosevelt-Lashawn Williams" and "prisoner" "Roosevelt L. Williams." Dkt. 8 at 2. However, the multiple previous cases confirming that Plaintiff has been the plaintiff in three matters qualifying as strikes leave no question as to Plaintiff's identity for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

Accordingly, the Magistrate Judge's R&R (Dkt. 6) is accepted and adopted as the findings and conclusions of the Court.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 17, 2012

Flint, Michigan

______________________

MARK A. GOLDSMITH

United States District Judge

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record and any unrepresented parties via the Court's ECF System to their respective email or First Class U.S. mail addresses disclosed on the Notice of Electronic Filing on May 17, 2012.

DEBORAH J. GOLTZ

Case Manager


Summaries of

Williams v. Wiley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
May 17, 2012
Civil Action No. 11-CV-15585 (E.D. Mich. May. 17, 2012)
Case details for

Williams v. Wiley

Case Details

Full title:ROOSEVELT WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. DENNIS M. WILEY, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Date published: May 17, 2012

Citations

Civil Action No. 11-CV-15585 (E.D. Mich. May. 17, 2012)