IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION DEVERICK SCOTT PLAINTIFF ADC #131042

v. CASE NO. 5:19-CV-00079 BSM WENDY KELLEY, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER After de novo review of the record, including Deverick Scott’s objections, United States Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris’s partial recommended disposition [Doc. No. 7] is adopted except as to the suggestion that the act of “dashing” (7.e., throwing urine at someone) cannot be considered a “risk of serious harm” and, thus, cannot give rise to an actionable constitutional claim. See Mero v. Independence County Jail,

, at *3 (E.D. Ark. March 21, 2014) (“being doused repeatedly with urine over the course of several days is not ‘harmless’”). Nevertheless, unlike the circumstances in Mero, the complaint establishes that Scott instigated these events and that the dashing occurred only twice. For these reasons and for the reasons provided in the recommend disposition, Scott

may proceed with his First Amendment retaliation claim against James Plummer. All other claims are dismissed without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED this 17th day of May 2019.

Bren 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE