Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-1_11-cv-00866/USCOURTS-almd-1_11-cv-00866-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 370
Nature of Suit: Other Fraud
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud

---

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

C.H. KINSEY, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CASE NO. 1:11-cv-866-MEF

)

CENTURYTEL, )

)

Defendant. )

O R D E R

This case is before the Court on a Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. #

7) to dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. # 6) prior to service of process, pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Plaintiff has filed a timely Objection. (Doc. # 8.) The Court reviews

de novo the portion of the Recommendation to which the Objection applies. 28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1).

As it is with Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint, Plaintiff’s Objection contains the barest

of conclusory allegations: “YOUR HONOR, . . . but fraud is fraud.” (Objection 1.)

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint fails to meet the pleading standards under Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure 8 and 9. After a review of the Recommendation and the Objection, it is

ORDERED that the Recommendation (Doc. # 7) is ADOPTED and the Objection (Doc. #

8) OVERRULED. An appropriate final judgment will be entered.

DONE this the 7 day of March, 2012.

th

/s/ Mark E. Fuller

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:11-cv-00866-MEF-WC Document 9 Filed 03/07/12 Page 1 of 1