Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-7_14-cv-01035/USCOURTS-alnd-7_14-cv-01035-0/pdf.json

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

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

WESTERN DIVISION

THOMAS JAMES ROBERTS, )

)

Plaintiff )

)

vs. ) CaseNo. 7:14-cv-01035-WMA-HGD

)

JUDGE HAROLD HUGHSTON, )

JR., et al., )

)

Defendants )

MEMORANDUM OF OPINION

The magistrate judge filed a report and recommendation on December 23,

2014, recommending that this action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 be dismissed

under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) for failing to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted. (Doc. 22). After filing his twelfth attempt to amend his complaint,

1 which

1 The plaintiff’s initial complaint (Doc. 1) was followed byeight subsequent motionsseeking

to add, delete, or otherwise modify the claims alleged. (See Docs. 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14). On

August 7, 2014, the plaintiff was ordered to file one final amended complaint. (Doc. 15). The

plaintiff complied with that order and filed his final amended complaint. (Doc. 20). After the order

had been issued, but before the plaintiff’s final amended complaint was received, several additional

motions to amend the complaint were received by the court. (See Docs. 16, 17, 18). Thereafter, the

second final amended complaint to which the plaintiff apparentlyis referring, was filed in December

of 2014. 

Page 1 of 2

FILED

 2015 Jan-26 PM 01:19

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 7:14-cv-01035-WMA-HGD Document 25 Filed 01/26/15 Page 1 of 2
was received by this court on December 29, 2014 (Doc. 23), the plaintiff filed

objections to the report and recommendation on January 6, 2015. (Doc. 24). 

The plaintiff objects to the failure of the magistrate judge to have considered

“the contention raised in the amended complaint.” (Doc. 24 at 1). The plaintiff fails,

however, to identify what contention in the amended complaint was not addressed in

the report and recommendation. 

Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materialsin the court

file, including the report and recommendation and the objections thereto, the court

is of the opinion that the objections are due to be and are hereby OVERRULED, the

magistrate judge’s report is due to be and is hereby ADOPTED and the

recommendation is ACCEPTED. Accordingly, the complaint is due to be dismissed

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b) for failing to state a claim upon which relief may

be granted. A Final Judgment will be entered. 

DONE this 26th day of January, 2015. 

_____________________________

WILLIAM M. ACKER, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2

Case 7:14-cv-01035-WMA-HGD Document 25 Filed 01/26/15 Page 2 of 2