United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Pine Bluff Division
PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Volpe, United states magistrate judge.
following recommended disposition has been sent to United
States District Judge James M. Moody, Jr. Any party may serve
and file written objections to this recommendation.
Objections should be specific and should include the factual
or legal basis for the objection. If the objection is to a
factual finding, specifically identify that finding and the
evidence that supports your objection. An original and one
copy of your objections must be received in the office of the
United States District Court Clerk no later than fourteen
(14) days from the date of the findings and recommendations.
The copy will be furnished to the opposing party. Failure to
file timely objections may result in waiver of the right to
appeal questions of fact.
are objecting to the recommendation and also desire to submit
new, different, or additional evidence, and to have a hearing
for this purpose before the District Judge, you must, at the
same time that you file your written objections, include the
1. Why the record made before the Magistrate Judge is
2. Why the evidence proffered at the hearing (if such a
hearing is granted) was not offered at the hearing before the
3. The details of any testimony desired to be introduced at
the new hearing in the form of an offer of proof, and a copy,
or the original, of any documentary or other non-testimonial
evidence desired to be introduced at the new hearing.
this submission, the District Judge will determine the
necessity for an additional evidentiary hearing. Mail your
objections and “Statement of Necessity” to:
Clerk, United States District Court Eastern District of
Arkansas 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite A149 Little Rock, AR
Stroup (“Plaintiff”) is incarcerated at the
Varner Unit of the Arkansas Department of Correction
(“ADC”) and filed this action pro se
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. No. 1.) In his
Complaint, he alleges, inter alia, that Defendant
Does, Warden James Gibson, Deputy Warden Jared Byers, and
Director Wendy Kelley subjected him to excessive force on
September 28, 2017. (Id.) He also sues Defendants
for “improper training.” (Id. at 4.)
Plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages as well as
injunctive relief. (Id. at 7.)
Kelley, Gibson, and Byers have now filed a Motion for Summary
Judgment, contending Plaintiff failed to exhaust his
administrative remedies before filing his lawsuit. (Doc. Nos.
18-20.) Plaintiff responded by moving for a voluntary
dismissal and admitting he “did miss a step in the
administrative remedies  due to [his] lack of knowledge in
the law and little to no assistance from the institution and
because of [his] indigent status [he] cannot afford a lawyer.
. ..” (Doc. No. 21.)
careful review, and for the following reasons, I find the
Motion for Summary Judgment should be GRANTED and this cause
of action should be dismissed without prejudice. I further
find Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss should be DENIED.