United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Statesboro Division
January 8, 2015
STEVEN JACOB SEIBERT, Plaintiff,
BRIAN OWENS, Commissioner; et al., Defendants.
B. AVANT EDENFIELD, District Judge.
After an independent and de novo review of the entire record, the undersigned concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Plaintiff filed Objections. Plaintiff also filed a letter, which was docketed as a Motion for Immediate Injunctive Relief. Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint, as well. In his Objections and in his Amended Complaint, Plaintiff sets forth no facts which indicate that the majority of his claims are not barred by the applicable statute of limitations period or that his claims are related to each other. Additionally, Plaintiff's allegations against several named Defendants do not show that these individuals are personally responsible for the alleged violations of Plaintiff's constitutional rights. To the extent Plaintiff asserts that his access to the courts has been denied or restricted, this appears to be a newly made assertion. This Court's usual practice is to not entertain arguments materials submitted for the first time in objections to a report and recommendation. Williams v. McNeil, 557 F.3d 1287 (11th Cir. 2009). Should Plaintiff wish to pursue an access to the courts claim, he may do so by filing a separate cause of action.
Plaintiff's Objections are overruled. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation is adopted as the opinion of the Court. Plaintiffs requests for injunctive relief, including the "Motion" at Docket Number 16, are DENIED. Plaintiff's Complaint is DISMISSED based on his failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter the appropriate judgment of dismissal.