Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-5_12-cv-04048/USCOURTS-alnd-5_12-cv-04048-2/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

NORTHEASTERN DIVISION

RONALD JERMAINE WASHINGTON, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) Case No. 5:12-cv-04048-RBP-RRA

)

OFFICER A. ARMSTRONG, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER

The magistrate judge filed a supplemental report and recommendation on April 2,

2013, recommending that all claims in this action, except the excessive force claim against

Officer A. Armstrong, be dismissed without prejudice for failing to state a claim upon which

relief can be granted. It was also recommended that the excessive force claimagainst Officer

Armstrong be referred to the magistrate judge for further proceedings.

The plaintiffsubmitted objections to the supplemental report and recommendation on

April 9, 2013. (Doc. #11). He contends that his claim against Officer Armstrong for verbal 1

harassment should also proceed because Armstrong’s words made him feel “humiliated and

belittled.” Id. However, allegations of verbal abuse or harassment by prison officials against

The plaintiff’s objections are unsigned, in violation of F. R. Civ. P. 11. However, because the 1

objections are groundless, requiring the plaintiff to submit a signed copy would be futile. 

FILED

 2013 Apr-29 AM 09:07

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 5:12-cv-04048-RBP-JHE Document 12 Filed 04/29/13 Page 1 of 2
a prisoner do not alone state a constitutional violation sufficient to form the basis of a

separate and distinct claim under § 1983. Hernandez v. Florida Department of Corrections,

281 Fed.Appx. 862, 866 (11 Cir, June 9, 2008); Collins v. Cundy, 603 F.2d 825 (10th Cir. th

1979); McDowell v. Jones, 990 F.2d 433, 434 (8 Cir. 1993); Stacey v. Ford, 554 F. Supp. th

8 (N.D. Ga. 1982). 

Having carefullyreviewed and considered de novo the initial and supplemental report

and recommendation and the objections thereto, the Court is of the opinion that the

magistrate judge's report is due to be and hereby is ADOPTED and his recommendation is

ACCEPTED. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that all claims in this action, except the

excessive force claim against Officer A. Armstrong, are DISMISSED WITHOUT

PREJUDICE, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1). It is further ORDERED that the

excessive force claim against defendant Armstrong is REFERRED to the magistrate judge

for further proceedings.

DATED this 29 day of April, 2013. th

 

 

ROBERT B. PROPST

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 5:12-cv-04048-RBP-JHE Document 12 Filed 04/29/13 Page 2 of 2