Filed: Sep. 11, 2013
Latest Update: Sep. 11, 2013
Summary: ORDER JOSEPH F. ANDERSON, Jr., District Judge. The pro se plaintiff, Calvin L. Gaddy, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 claiming violations of his constitutional rights by the defendants with regard to the process and results of a prison disciplinary hearing. At the time the complaint was filed, the plaintiff was incarcerated at the Perry Correctional Institution of the South Carolina Department of Corrections. He is now housed at the Lieber Correctional Institution. The Magis
Summary: ORDER JOSEPH F. ANDERSON, Jr., District Judge. The pro se plaintiff, Calvin L. Gaddy, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 claiming violations of his constitutional rights by the defendants with regard to the process and results of a prison disciplinary hearing. At the time the complaint was filed, the plaintiff was incarcerated at the Perry Correctional Institution of the South Carolina Department of Corrections. He is now housed at the Lieber Correctional Institution. The Magist..
More
ORDER
JOSEPH F. ANDERSON, Jr., District Judge.
The pro se plaintiff, Calvin L. Gaddy, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claiming violations of his constitutional rights by the defendants with regard to the process and results of a prison disciplinary hearing. At the time the complaint was filed, the plaintiff was incarcerated at the Perry Correctional Institution of the South Carolina Department of Corrections. He is now housed at the Lieber Correctional Institution.
The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action1 has prepared a Report and Recommendation2 suggesting that plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction is moot. The Report sets forth in detail the relevant facts and standards of law on this matter, and the court incorporates such without a recitation and without a hearing.
The plaintiff was advised of his right to file objections to the Report and Recommendation which was docketed on August 6, 2013. The plaintiff filed an objection memorandum which appears to support the claims contained in his original complaint without specifically addressing the Report and Recommendation. The court has conducted the required de novo review of the objections and finds them to be without merit.
As the Magistrate Judge correctly notes, the Fourth Circuit has held that a prisoner's transfer moots requests for declaratory and injunctive relief. See Williams v. Griffin, 952 F.2d 820 (4th Cir. 1991). Here, when plaintiff was transferred from Perry Correctional Institution to Lieber Correctional Institution, his claims for injunctive relief against the defendants were rendered moot.
After a careful review of the record, the applicable law, the Report and Recommendation, and the objections thereto, the court adopts the Magistrate Judge's recommendation and incorporates the Report herein by reference. Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction (ECF No. 21) is moot.
The Clerk shall return this file to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
