RICKEY DEWAYNE BOOTH, #240358 v. KAY IVEY, et al.
CASE NO. 2:18-CV-419-MHT (WO)
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION
May 8, 2018
Susan Russ Walker, United States Magistrate Judge
RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
I. INTRODUCTION
This
II. DISCUSSION
The Bibb Correctional Facility is located within the jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, and the actions about which Booth complains occurred in that district. Moreover, it appears from the complaint that the majority of individuals named as defendants and personally responsible for the challenged actions – that is, correctional and mental health officials employed at Bibb – reside in the Northern District of Alabama. Although—by virtue of their positions as Governor of the State of Alabama, and Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner of the Alabama Department of Corrections—defendants Kay Ivey, Jefferson Dunn and J. Watson reside in the Middle District of Alabama, they are nonetheless subject to service of process throughout the State and commonly defend suits in all federal courts of this state.
In light of the foregoing and in accordance with applicable federal law, the court concludes that in the interest of justice and for the convenience of the parties, this case,
III. CONCLUSION
Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that this case be transferred to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama pursuant to the provisions of
The plaintiff may file objections to the Recommendation on or before May 22, 2018. Any objection must specifically identify the findings in the Recommendation objected to. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections will not be considered by the District Court. The plaintiff is advised that this Recommendation is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is not appealable.
Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations set forth in this document will bar a de novo determination by the District Court of factual findings and legal issues covered in the Recommendation and shall “waive the right to challenge on appeal the district court‘s order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions” except upon grounds of plain error if necessary in the interests of justice. 11TH Cir. R. 3-1; see Resolution Trust Co. v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993); Henley v. Johnson, 885 F.2d 790, 794 (11th Cir. 1989).
Done, on this the 8th day of May, 2018.
/s/ Susan Russ Walker
Susan Russ Walker
United States Magistrate Judge
