Mays v. Joseph

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION RYAN ALEXANDER MAYS, ) Plaintiff, v. CV 119-215 EVAN JOSEPH, Defendant.

ORDER

After a careful, de novo review of the file, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), to which objections have been filed. (Doc. no, 20.) In his objections, Plaintiff argues the Magistrate Judge erred by recommending dismissal of Plaintiff's deliberate indifference to a serious medical need claim because Plaintiff never alleged Defendant knew of his medical profile for a skin ailment. (Doc. no. 20, pp. 1-2; see doc. no. 17, p. 5; doc. no. 15, p. 5.) Plaintiff now states, only in his objections, he told Defendant repeatedly about the existence of his medical profile. (Doc. no. 20, pp. 1-2.) This information was not before the Magistrate Judge. While courts have the discretion to consider novel evidence, factual claims, and legal argument raised for the first time in an objection to an R&R, they are under no obligation to do so. Frone v. JP Morgan Chase & Co., 695 F. App’x 468, 472 (11th Cir. 2017) (concluding district judge has broad discretion in considering argument not presented to magistrate judge); Williams v. McNeil,

557 F.3d 1287, 1292 (11th Cir. 2009) (same). The Court chooses not to consider Plaintiffs new factual claims here because Plaintiff had every chance to include all factual allegations in his amended complaint after the Magistrate Judge vacated the initial screen and gave Plaintiff specific instructions to include all factual claims in his amended complaint. (See doc. no. 14, pp. 2-4.) Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge as its opinion, OVERRULES Plaintiffs objections, and DISMISSES Plaintiff's claims for deliberate indifference to a serious medical need, failing to contact the Georgia Board of Pardons and Parole, and refusing to act properly for failure to state a claim against them upon which relief can be granted. The case shall proceed against Defendant as described in the Magistrate Judge’s June 3, 2020 Order. (See doc. no. 19.) SO ORDERED this day of July, 2020, at Augusta, Georgia. p§ pel = ABIES DAL HALL, CHIEF JUDGE D STATES DISTRICT COURT OUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA