Ford v. Stewart ( 2020 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION FREDERICK FORD, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) CIV. ACT. NO. 1:18-cv-0166-TFM-MU ) CYNTHIA STEWART, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER On October 20, 2020, the Magistrate Judge entered a report and recommendation which recommends Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment be granted. See Doc. 50. Plaintiff timely filed objections and also attempts to supplement his complaint. See Docs. 51, 52. The Court has reviewed the report and recommendation, objections, and conducted a de novo review of the case file. For the reasons discussed below, the objections are OVERRULED, the attempt to supplement or amend the complaint is DENIED, and the Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED. In Plaintiff’s objections, he complains that the Magistrate Judge made a ruling without certain documents. See Doc. 51 at 2. However, Plaintiff had the opportunity to response to the motion for summary judgment and did so without including the information. See Doc. 49. In reviewing a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the Court does not consider objections based on arguments not raised before the magistrate judge. See Williams v. McNeil, 557 F.3d 1287, 1292 (11th Cir. 2009).1 Next, to the extent he complains about new conditions of confinement in the segregation unit of his current facility, those do not relate to his original complaint and are not 1 Even the Court considered it, it would be overruled because nothing referenced in that particular objection overcomes the Magistrate Judge’s well-reasoned analysis. part of this lawsuit. See Doc. 51 at 6. Finally, to the extent Plaintiff attempts to amend his complaint post-briefing on the motion for summary judgment and the issuance of the Report and Recommendation, that request is DENIED and the supplement is not considered. To the extent it attempts to add new claims related to his new facility, the Court declines to consider those as part of this lawsuit. To the extent Plaintiff has new complaints, those would be the basis of a separate lawsuit. Though the Court cautions Plaintiff to carefully review his claims because of the implications of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) when he seeks to file a lawsuit in forma pauperis. After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to the issues raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objection is made, it is ORDERED as follows: (1) Plaintiff’s objections (Doc. 51) are OVERRULED; (2) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 50) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court; (3) The Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 48) is GRANTED; (4) Plaintiff’s claims are DISMISSED with prejudice. Final judgment shall issue separately in accordance with this order and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. DONE and ORDERED this 10th day of December, 2020. /s/Terry F. Moorer TERRY F. MOORER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE