Hope v. Woods (INMATE 3)
Opinion
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION
SHERARD HOPE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. v. ) 2:18cv239-MHT ) (WO) WALTER WOODS, et al., ) ) Defendants. )
OPINION
Pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), plaintiff, who was at the time a federal prisoner, filed this lawsuit contending that defendants subjected him to unconstitutional conditions of confinement by failing to eradicate quickly a colony of bats living in the roof spaces of his housing unit, which posed a particular health threat to him due to a respiratory condition. This lawsuit is now before the court on the recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge that defendants’ motion to dismiss be granted for plaintiff’s failure to exhaust administrative remedies, that this case be dismissed with prejudice, and that no costs be taxed. There are no objections to the recommendation. After
an independent and de novo review of the record, the court concludes that the magistrate judge’s recommendation should be adopted. An appropriate judgment will be entered.
DONE, this the 25th day of February, 2021. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hope v. Woods (INMATE 3) (Hope v. Woods (INMATE 3)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.