Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-3_15-cv-00383/USCOURTS-almd-3_15-cv-00383-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

EASTERN DIVISION

DANNY L. BROOKS,

Plaintiff,

v.

ROBERT McDONALD, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 3:15-CV-383-WKW

 [WO]

 

ORDER

On February 11, 2016, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc. 

# 53) to which Plaintiff filed an objection (Doc. # 54). The court has conducted an 

independent and de novo review of those portions of the Recommendation to 

which objection is made. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The Complaint contains no 

allegations that demonstrate a plausible claim against Defendants The Montgomery 

Advertiser and Kala Kachmar (collectively “Defendants”). The 

Recommendation’s analysis is sound, and Plaintiff’s objection lacks merit. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:

1. Plaintiff’s objection (Doc. # 54) is OVERRULED. 

2. The Recommendation (Doc. # 53) is ADOPTED.

3. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 29) is GRANTED.

Case 3:15-cv-00383-WKW-CSC Document 55 Filed 02/26/16 Page 1 of 2
2

4. Plaintiff’s claims against The Montgomery Advertiser and Kala 

Kachmar are DISMISSED for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be 

granted. 

5. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to terminate The Montgomery 

Advertiser and Kala Kachmar as Defendants in this action. 

6. This action is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further 

proceedings.

DONE this 26th day of February, 2016. 

 /s/ W. Keith Watkins 

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:15-cv-00383-WKW-CSC Document 55 Filed 02/26/16 Page 2 of 2