United States District Court, Middle District of Alabama, Southern Division
February 12, 2015
KENNETH W. DAVIDSON, # 274 925, Plaintiff,
WARDEN SHARON MCSWAIN-HOLLAND, et al., Defendants.
W. KEITH WATKINS, CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On January 27, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation in this case. (Doc. # 36.) On February 2, 2015, Plaintiff Kenneth W. Davidson filed objections. (Doc. # 37.) After an independent and de novo review of those portions of the Recommendation to which objection is made, Mr. Davidson’s objections are due to be overruled and the Recommendation adopted. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b).
Mr. Davidson objects to the Recommendation on the following five grounds: (1) By recommending the dismissal of his lawsuit, the Recommendation “send[s] the wrong messages to anyone trying to get fair and impartial treatment from any-one [sic] in the Dep[artment] of Corrections;” (2) Warden McSwain-Holland lied when she said that two white inmates were working laundry during an alleged incident of discrimination; (3) Chief Youngblood lied when he stated that Mr. Davidson showed up an hour late to the food line; (4) On August 16, 2012, Warden McSwain-Holland threatened Mr. Davidson for filing this lawsuit; and (5) Warden McSwain-Holland and Chief Youngblood “have lied to this court and . . . to dismiss this suit would be a great unjustice [sic] for anyone.” (Doc. # 37.)
Mr. Davidson’s objections fail to cure the deficiencies of his claims. Specifically, Mr. Davidson has failed to present any evidence, in his objections or otherwise, demonstrating that Defendants were motivated by a racially discriminatory purpose when engaging in the conduct complained of by Mr. Davidson. Even taking as true his allegations regarding the statements of Warden McSwain-Holland and Chief Youngblood, Mr. Davidson’s objections do not create a genuine dispute of material fact regarding his equal protection claim.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED as follows:
1. Mr. Davidson’s objection (Doc. # 37) is OVERRULED.
2. The Recommendation (Doc. # 36) is ADOPTED.
3. Mr. Davidson’s Motion to Dismiss Defendant Smith-James (Doc. # 18) is GRANTED, and Defendant Smith-James is DISMISSED with prejudice.
4. Defendants Sharon McSwain-Holland’s and Jesse Youngblood’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. # 15) is GRANTED.
5. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice.
A final judgment will be entered separately.