Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-4_05-cv-01724/USCOURTS-alnd-4_05-cv-01724-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

The scheduling order entered in this case clearly outlines when briefs are due. “After a motion 1

for summary judgment has been filed, the opponent’s responsive submission shall be filed not later

than twenty-one (21) days after the date the summary judgment is filed.” Exhibit A, to the

Scheduling Order of April 5, 2006, at 1. The response briefs of the plaintiff would have been due on

January 22, 2007, January 30, 2007, and February 9, 2007. No motion for an extension was filed by the

plaintiff. 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

MIDDLE DIVISION

JASON JELKS, )

)

PLAINTIFF, )

)

VS. ) CASE NO.: CV-05-PT-1724-M

)

CITY OF GADSDEN, ALABAMA; )

RON LEEK, individually and as )

police officer for the City of )

Gadsden, Alabama; CITY OF )

RAINBOW CITY, ALABAMA; )

CHARLES CLIFTON, individually )

and as police officer for the City of )

Rainbow City, Alabama, )

)

DEFENDANTS. )

Memorandum Opinion

The case comes before the court on the motions for summary judgment by the City of

Rainbow City, Alabama (doc. 28), the City of Gadsden, Alabama and Ron Leek (doc. 31), and

Charles Clifton (doc. 34). Although a briefing schedule was entered, the plaintiff did not respond

to the motions. 

1

On July 6, 2007, the magistrate issued a report and recommendation, and recommended that

the motions be granted and this case be dismissed. The time for objections has now expired and no

objections have been filed.

Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including

FILED

 2007 Jul-25 AM 09:57

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 4:05-cv-01724-RBP Document 45 Filed 07/25/07 Page 1 of 2
2

the report and recommendation, the Court is of the opinion that the magistrate judge’s report is due

to be and is hereby ADOPTED and his recommendation is ACCEPTED. The Court

EXPRESSLY FINDS that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that the defendants are

entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Accordingly, defendants’ motions for summary judgment

are due to be GRANTED and this action is due to be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. A Final

Judgment will be entered.

DONE this the 25 day of July, 2007. th

 

 ROBERT B. PROPST

 SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:05-cv-01724-RBP Document 45 Filed 07/25/07 Page 2 of 2