DAVIS v. DEESE, 5:12-CV-328 (MTT). (2013)
Court: District Court, M.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20130909644
Visitors: 5
Filed: Sep. 06, 2013
Latest Update: Sep. 06, 2013
Summary: ORDER MARC T. TREADWELL, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Stephen Hyles. (Doc. 40). The Magistrate Judge, having reviewed Defendant Jimmy Jones's motion to dismiss (Doc. 19) and Defendant Terry Deese's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 26), recommends dismissing the Plaintiff's Complaint because he failed to exhaust his available administrative remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1997e(a). 1 Additionally, the Magistrate Judg
Summary: ORDER MARC T. TREADWELL, District Judge. This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Stephen Hyles. (Doc. 40). The Magistrate Judge, having reviewed Defendant Jimmy Jones's motion to dismiss (Doc. 19) and Defendant Terry Deese's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 26), recommends dismissing the Plaintiff's Complaint because he failed to exhaust his available administrative remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1997e(a). 1 Additionally, the Magistrate Judge..
More
ORDER
MARC T. TREADWELL, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Stephen Hyles. (Doc. 40). The Magistrate Judge, having reviewed Defendant Jimmy Jones's motion to dismiss (Doc. 19) and Defendant Terry Deese's motion for summary judgment (Doc. 26), recommends dismissing the Plaintiff's Complaint because he failed to exhaust his available administrative remedies pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1997e(a).1 Additionally, the Magistrate Judge recommends denying the Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction as moot. (Docs. 12 and 14). The Plaintiff filed an objection to the Recommendation. (Doc. 41). Both Defendants have responded to the Plaintiff's objections. (Docs. 42 and 43). The Plaintiff has also replied to the Defendants' responses. (Doc. 44).
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the Court has thoroughly considered the Plaintiff's objections and has made a de novo review of the portions of the Recommendation to which the Plaintiff objects. The Court accepts and adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge. The Recommendation is adopted and made the order of this Court. Because the Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, his Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice and his motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. 12) is DENIED as moot.
SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. The Court notes that "exhaustion of administrative remedies is a matter in abatement and not generally an adjudication on the merits" and, therefore, "is not ordinarily the proper subject for a summary judgment; instead, it should be raised in a motion to dismiss, or be treated as such if raised in a motion for summary judgment." Bryant v. Rich, 530 F.3d 1368, 1374-75 (11th Cir. 2008) (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Source: Leagle
