Randles v. FBI of Mobile AL

S.D. Alabama

Randles v. FBI of Mobile AL

DecidedApril 12, 2023

Docket1:22-cv-00405

StatusUnknown

This text of Randles v. FBI of Mobile AL (Randles v. FBI of Mobile AL) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Randles v. FBI of Mobile AL, (S.D. Ala. 2023).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION

ALEXANDER HILTON RANDLES, ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION 1:22-00405-KD-MU ) FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,) Defendant. )

ORDER

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 Recommendation to which objection is made, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and dated February 27, 2023 (Doc. 24) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint (Doc. 15) is GRANTED and Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice.1 DONE and ORDERED this the 12th day of April 2023. /s/ Kristi K. DuBose KRISTI K. DuBOSE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1 Although six (6) months have passed since Plaintiff initiated his administrative claim in October 2022, the Court lacked jurisdiction at the time the Complaint was filed on October 17, 2022. See, e.g., McNeil v. U.S., 508 U.S. 106 (1993); Davis v. United States, 272 Fed. Appx. 863 (11th Cir. 2008).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION

ALEXANDER HILTON RANDLES, ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION 1:22-00405-KD-MU ) FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION,) Defendant. )

ORDER

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 Recommendation to which objection is made, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and dated February 27, 2023 (Doc. 24) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint (Doc. 15) is GRANTED and Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice.1 DONE and ORDERED this the 12th day of April 2023. /s/ Kristi K. DuBose KRISTI K. DuBOSE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1 Although six (6) months have passed since Plaintiff initiated his administrative claim in October 2022, the Court lacked jurisdiction at the time the Complaint was filed on October 17, 2022. See, e.g., McNeil v. U.S., 508 U.S. 106 (1993); Davis v. United States, 272 Fed. Appx. 863 (11th Cir. 2008).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Randles v. FBI of Mobile AL, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/randles-v-fbi-of-mobile-al-alsd-2023.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack