Whitaker v. Donini, 1:18-cv-625. (2018)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20181126c16
Visitors: 8
Filed: Nov. 21, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 21, 2018
Summary: DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 4) TIMOTHY S. BLACK , District Judge . This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference to United State Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings and, on October 24, 2018, submitted a Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 4). No objections were filed. As required by 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P.
Summary: DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 4) TIMOTHY S. BLACK , District Judge . This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference to United State Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings and, on October 24, 2018, submitted a Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 4). No objections were filed. As required by 28 U.S.C. 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. ..
More
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 4)
TIMOTHY S. BLACK, District Judge.
This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference to United State Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings and, on October 24, 2018, submitted a Report and Recommendation. (Doc. 4). No objections were filed.
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court does determine that such Report and Recommendation should be and is hereby adopted in its entirety.
Accordingly:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 4) is ADOPTED; and
2. The Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and 1915A(b)(1), with the exception of Plaintiff's claim against the Defendants in their official capacities for the alleged deprivation of adequate medical care pursuant to a policy prohibiting the administration of controlled substances to inmates at the Scioto County Corrections Center.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
