Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-2_10-cv-01057/USCOURTS-almd-2_10-cv-01057-3/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 DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

GLEN I. TAYLOR, #127 254 )

)

Plaintiff, )

) 2:10-CV-1057-ID

v. )

) (WO)

JUDGE BURT SMITHART, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

O R D E R

Before the court are the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, (Doc. #5), the

Supplemental Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, (Doc. #7), and the Plaintiff’s

objections to those recommendations, (Docs. #6 and #8). Having conducted a de novo

determination of those portions of the Magistrate’srecommendationsto which objections are

made, it is CONSIDERED and ORDERED as follows:

1. Petitioner’s objections (Docs. #6 and #8) be and the same are hereby

OVERRULED;

2. The recommendations of the Magistrate Judge (Docs. #5 and #7) be and the

same are hereby ADOPTED, APPROVED and AFFIRMED;

3. Plaintiff’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint against the named defendants be and

the same is hereby DISMISSED with prejudice in accordance with the

provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii);

Case 2:10-cv-01057-ID-SRW Document 9 Filed 03/30/11 Page 1 of 2
4. Plaintiff’s challenge to the constitutionality of his current incarceration be

and the same is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to the

provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) because that claim is not

properly before the Court at this time;

5. Plaintiff’s complaint, to the extent it may be construed as a writ of

mandamus, be and the same is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction;

6. Plaintiff’s action, to the extent it is considered a complaint for declaratory

judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201 and Rule 57 of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure, be and the same is hereby DENIED pursuant to the

provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(ii) and DISMISSED prior to

service of process; and

7. This case be and the same is hereby DISMISSED prior to service of process

in accordance with the directives of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(iii).

DONE this the 30th day of March, 2011.

/s/ Ira DeMent

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 2:10-cv-01057-ID-SRW Document 9 Filed 03/30/11 Page 2 of 2