Truitt v. Bear
Truitt v. Bear
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
JESSIE F. TRUITT, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-21-929-J ) CARL BEAR, et al., ) ) Defendants. )
ORDER
Plaintiff, a state prisoner appearing pro se and in forma pauperis, brings this action pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his constitutional rights. The matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Gary M. Purcell for initial proceedings consistent with
28 U.S.C. § 636. [Doc. No. 4]. On June 17, 2022, Judge Purcell issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that Defendants Carl Bear and Scott Crow’s Motion to Dismiss, converted to a motion for summary judgment, be granted and Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Russell Serventi be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) based on Plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies and therefore, failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. [Doc. No. 37]. Plaintiff was advised of his right to object to the Report and Recommendation by July 7, 2022. No objection has been filed. Plaintiff has therefore waived any right to appellate review of the factual and legal issues in the Report and Recommendation. See Moore v. United States,
950 F.2d 656, 659(10th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 37], GRANTS Defendants Bear and Crow’s Motion to Dismiss [Doc. No. 28], converted to a motion for summary judgment, and DISMISSES without prejudice Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant Serventi pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. IT IS SO ORDERED this 26" day of July, 2022.
BERNARD M. JONES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Reference
- Status
- Unknown