Ricard
v.
Nail

This case is not covered by Casetext's citator
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA SHREVEPORT DIVISIONJul 25, 2018
CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-cv-1580 (W.D. La. Jul. 25, 2018)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 17-cv-1580

07-25-2018

JEREMY RICARD v. LONNIE NAIL, ET AL


JUDGE DOUGHTY

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Jeremy Ricard ("Plaintiff") is a self-represented prisoner housed at the David Wade Correctional Center. His complaint alleges that he was subjected to excessive force by use of chemical spray and slamming his head into a wall and locker during an incident in August 2016. The four named defendants have filed an answer, and discovery is underway.

Early in the case, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Protective Order (Doc. 8) in which he complained that he was exposed to extreme cold temperatures in his cell in February 2018, he was denied adequate access to legal material, and prison officials opened his legal mail before it arrived at his cell. That motion should be denied without prejudice because the matters asserted in the motion are far outside the scope of the claim set forth in the original complaint.

If Plaintiff wishes to pursue such an unrelated claim, he must exhaust his administrative remedies with respect to a claim and file a separate civil action. He is warned that once he has filed three civil actions or appeals that have been dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted, he will not be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

Accordingly,

IT IS RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Protective Order (Doc. 8) be denied.

Objections

Under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), parties aggrieved by this recommendation have fourteen (14) days from service of this report and recommendation to file specific, written objections with the Clerk of Court, unless an extension of time is granted under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). A party may respond to another party's objections within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Counsel are directed to furnish a courtesy copy of any objections or responses to the District Judge at the time of filing.

A party's failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendation set forth above, within 14 days after being served with a copy, shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court. See Douglass v. U.S.A.A., 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

THUS DONE AND SIGNED in Shreveport, Louisiana, this 25th day of July, 2018.

/s/ _________


Mark L. Hornsby


U.S. Magistrate Judge