Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-5_16-cv-00750/USCOURTS-alnd-5_16-cv-00750-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHEASTERN DIVISION

ROBERT E. KING,

Plaintiff,

v.

HUNTSVILLE POLICE DEPARTMENT, 

et al.,

Defendants.

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

}

Case No.: 5:16-cv-00750-RDP-JEO

ORDER

On August 24, 2016, the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 7) was 

entered and Plaintiff was allowed therein fourteen (14) days in which to file objections to the 

recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. No objections have been filed.

1

After careful consideration of the record in this case and the Magistrate Judge’s Report 

and Recommendation, the court hereby ADOPTS the Report of the Magistrate Judge and 

ACCEPTS the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. It is therefore ORDERED that all of 

Plaintiff’s claims in this action, except the Fourth Amendment claim against Officer K. Wooden

identified in the Report, are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 

1915A(b)(1). It is further ORDERED that the Fourth Amendment claim against Defendant

Wooden is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings

 

1

Plaintiff sent a letter to the court on September 2, 2016. The letter states that Plaintiff has an appeal 

pending before the Alabama Supreme Court and inquires whether the court will require the Huntsville Police 

Department to release a video of the stop at issue in this action. (Doc. # 8). Plaintiff’s letter contains no objections 

to the Report, as it does not point to any purported incorrect finding of fact or recommendation of law in the Report. 

(Doc. # 7 at 13 (“Objections should specifically identify all findings of fact and recommendations to which 

objection is made and the specific basis for objection.”)). Plaintiff’s inquiry about the video is premature because 

the complaint has not been served upon Defendants.

FILED

 2016 Sep-13 AM 09:07

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 5:16-cv-00750-RDP-JEO Document 9 Filed 09/13/16 Page 1 of 2
2

DONE and ORDERED this September 13, 2016.

_________________________________

R. DAVID PROCTOR

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:16-cv-00750-RDP-JEO Document 9 Filed 09/13/16 Page 2 of 2