Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-4_20-cv-00171/USCOURTS-ared-4_20-cv-00171-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

CENTRAL DIVISION 

RAYMEY VOSS, PLAINTIFF 

#213751 

v. Case No. 4:20-cv-00171-LPR 

DYLAN BERRYMAN, et al. DEFENDANTS

ORDER

On March 2, 2020, the Court received a Recommended Disposition (“the 

Recommendation”) from United States Magistrate Judge Beth Deere recommending dismissal 

without prejudice for failure to prosecute. (Doc. 4). Plaintiff Raymey Voss filed an Objection 

to the Recommendation on March 10, 2020. (Doc. 5). After careful review of the 

Recommendation and the Objection, and a de novo review of the record, the Court concludes that 

the Recommendation should be, and hereby is, approved and adopted as this Court’s findings with 

one revision. 

The Recommendation states that Mr. Voss “alleges that on the night of January 17, 2019, 

Defendant Berryman shined a flashlight in his face and awakened him for no apparent reason.” 

(Doc. 4 at 2). Mr. Voss does not object to this characterization of his account. However, the 

Court notes that Mr. Voss’s Complaint states, “[o]n January 17, 2019 I put in my First Grievance 

on OIC Berryman for targeting, intimidating, and harassing me throughout the night shining a 

Flashlight in my Face and Coming in my cell waking me up For no reason.” (Doc. 2 at 7). It 

seems unlikely that the conduct would have occurred on the same date that the grievance was filed, 

so it is unclear to the Court on which night, or nights, this conduct occurred. This slight 

Case 4:20-cv-00171-LPR Document 7 Filed 03/20/20 Page 1 of 2
2 

ambiguity in reading Mr. Voss’s Complaint does not preclude the Court from adopting Judge 

Deere’s Recommendation, which is otherwise correct in all other respects. The Court ADOPTS 

the Recommendation. (Doc. 4). Mr. Voss’s claims are DISMISSED without prejudice. This 

dismissal constitutes a “strike” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 

IT IS SO ORDERED this 20th day of March 2020. 

________________________________ 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 4:20-cv-00171-LPR Document 7 Filed 03/20/20 Page 2 of 2